Secretary of State - John Kerry
Judges, et. als. in the Hawaiian Islands
Re: Hawaiian Kingdom Notice Number 2015-1119 Opposition to U.S. President Obama, Entity State of Hawaii Governor Ige In Allowing Syrians Into Our Neutral, Friendly, Non Violent Nation; Opposition to the building of the Telescope on Mauna Kea by Foreigners; Opposition to Arrests of Kanaka Maoli and Friends on Mauna Kea, Haleakala, etc. and Other Issues and Reminders by Amelia Gora, Acting Liaison of Foreign Affairs, one of the True Land Owner(s), Kamehameha's Descendants/Heirs and Successors, Royal Person, Royal Family Member, One of Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli's Heirs and Successors, Acting Liaison of Foreign Affairs,Judicial Tribunal Member, Land Owner, Title Owner, House of Nobles Member, Konohiki, Hawaiian Genealogical Society Representative
The following message was posted on Governor David Ige's Facebook page:
"Opposition to Syrians in Hawaii is hereby documented from the Acting Liaison of Foreign Affairs, Amelia Gora, a Royal person, House of Nobles member, Judicial Tribunal Member, Konohiki, Hawaiian Genealogical Society Representative. The 1849/1850 Treaty of the Hawaiian Kingdom and the United States of America Treaty is a permanent Friendship and Amity Treaty. Reminder that Treaties supersedes State, Federal Laws and are the Supreme Law of the land.....One of the many concerns are the safety of our subjects/citizens who are now faced with more animosities from PTSD/post traumatic stress disorder vets who have been in Wars including the Middle East....then placed in a mix of forced occupers by a Warmongering President. who illegally allows people to occupy Private properties of our Royal Families, which is Not O.K. Intended violence seems to be the goal of the occupiers because there are many unresolved issues with our Hawaiian people, genocide issues, False Flag issues, etc. Royal Family members were killed/murdered: Pickard, and Greg Wongham, et. als. Kanaka Maoli have been wrongfully arrested, imprisoned over time, and many appear to have been wrongfully imprisoned over time as well. There are many PTSD vets who have anger issues, many are homeless. There are many Kanaka Maoli who are homeless, and Micronesians who have been helped by utilizing our Hawaiian monies, lands, etc. Even our Trusts have been utilized by foreigners, which is Not ok. The Royal Families exists, including myself, a descendant/heir of Kamehameha, Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli, Kaoleioku, Kanekapolei 2 (female), Kalanihelemaiiluna Paki - 4 children of Kamehameha, a descendants of Kamehameha's eight (8) step children, the heirs and successors of Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli who signed the Treaty with the United States of America President Zachary Taylor. I hereby document Opposition to more immigrants in our Hawaiian Islands. The Crown Lands, Government Lands are lands belonging to our Royal Families and research has uncovered the laws signed by Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli including laws affecting married persons. The wrongful claim to land by the U.S. is through a deed which was made by the claim of Alii Miriam Kekauonohi's husband who married Anaderia Amoe who then conveyed to her brother-in-law, who in turn sold the lands to Oahu Rail, Oahu Rail sold to the U.S. The fact of the matter is that Miriam Kekauonohi's husband Levi Haalelea did not inherit and her lands went to heirs including Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli who died three (3) years after Miriam Kekauonohi died. Haalelea made a case against Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli AFTER he died. The Judges wrongfully, criminally supported the claims of Levi Haalelea disregarding the laws of the land of Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli. The willful disregard of the laws earned the Judges, Anaderia Amoe, her brother in law a place on the Tribunal List based on Article XIV of the 1849/1850 Treaty of the Hawaiian Kingdom and the United States of America. Therefore, those listed on the Tribunal List were legally, lawfully dispossessed. See http://theiolani.blogspot.com/2015/11/legal-notice-matters-of-treaty-20th.html Opposition to U.S. President Obama, and your acceptance to his command is hereby documented for the Syrians to enter the Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii; Opposition to the creation of a entity called Na'i Aupuni/Nai Aupuni which is also documented in the Judicial Tribunal list; Opposition to the Rail continues; Opposition to the wrongful arrests of Kanaka Maoli on Mauna Kea; Opposition to the building of the Telescope on Mauna Kea which sits on the Hawaiian Kingdom government lands and documented in Volume 6 HAWAIIAN REPORTS as Kaohi in Harris case, etc. is hereby posted for the World to see. More Legal Notices have been posted over time and have been served over the years to the entity State of Hawaii Attorney General office, U.S. Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama. News on the web IOLANI - The Royal Hawk has also been posted for more than 10 years with 573 issues to date. An American Embassy needs to be in place because the Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii exists. The 1849/1850 Treaty continues as a permanent friendship and amity treaty with our neutral, non-violent friendly nation .....aloha. Addition Reference: HAWAIIAN REPORTS Rex vs. Joseph Booth case http://myweb.ecomplanet.com/GORA8037 "
Summary
The following points were made:
1) Objections to Syrians in the Hawaiian Islands.
2) The 1849/1850 Treaty of the Hawaiian Kingdom and the United States of America is a permanet treaty of friendship and amity and supersedes State, Federal laws and is the Supreme Law of the land
3) Concern for PTSD/post traumatic stress disorder veterans who fought in Middle East Wars, etc.
4) Opposition to U.S. President Obama who is illegally allowing immigrants into the Hawaiian Islands: Syrians, Micronesians, etc.
5) Opposition to Nai Aupuni/Na'i Aupuni, etc. listed on the Judicial Tribunal list.
6) Opposition to the arrest of Kanaka Maoli and friends on Mauna Kea, etc. (Haleakala - Crown Lands and Government Lands).
7) Opposition to the occupation of our Royal Families lands - includes Crown Lands.
8) Unresolved issues, genocide, piracy, pillaging, False Flag issues, etc. continues and documented.
9) Royal Families/members killed: Pickard, Greg Wongham, et. als.
10) Kanaka Maoli wrongfully arrested/political prisoners, etc. - not o.k. - review by the Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii personnel needs to be made.
11) PTSD vets have issues, homeless, etc. create potential volatile situations.
12) Assistance to foreigners, not kanaka maoli, is not O.K. It is unacceptable to use monies of our Royal Families Trusts, etc.
13) The Royal Families exists including myself, Amelia Gora, one of the bloodlines/heirs, direct descendant of Kamehameha through four (4) of his children; six (6) of his step children; and two (2) of his hanai/adopted children.
14) Opposition to more immigrants into the Hawaiian Islands.
15) Fraud/wrongful claim to lands in Hawaii by a fraud based deed showing that the lands of Miriam Kekauonohi were to go to her heirs and successors. Her husband under the laws of marriages did not inherit. Her husband Levi Haalelea made a suit against Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli after his death, the court erroneously, criminally granted lands to Levi Haalelea and his new wife Anaderia Amoe. Anaderia Amoe deeded lands she did not own to her brother-in-law. Her brother-in-law sold to Oahu Railway, etc. Oahu Rail/Railway sold to the United States after the planned, premeditated dethronement of Queen Liliuokalani.
17) All on the Judicial Tribunal list were legally, lawfully dispossessed.
18) Opposition to U.S. President Obama and Governor Ige repeated.
19) Opposition to Nai/Na'i Aupuni, a entity created by the U.S. documented. They have also been added to the Judicial Tribunal list (Legal Notice null and voiding illegal contracts made was sent previously affecting Nai/Na'i Aupuni, etc.)
20) Opposition to the Rail/Railway on Oahu documented.
21) Opposition to arrests of Kanaka Maoli and friends opposing the Telescope Project on Mauna Kea, etc. documented.
The land Kaohi, is part of the Hawaiian government lands/the Hawaiian Kingdom/Hawaiian Kingdom government lands.
22) Legal Notices have been posted to U.S. President Clinton, Bush, and Obama.
23) The news on the web called the IOLANI - The Royal Hawk has been posted weekly for more than 10 years with 573 issues to date. See: theiolani.blogspot.com
24) An American Embassy needs to be here because the Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii/He Mokupuni Pae Aina o Hawaii/Ko Hawaii Pae Aina/Hawaiian archipelago/Hawaiian Islands/Hawaii exists. See HAWAIIAN REPORTS case: Rex vs. Joseph Booth for explanation of the Hawaiian Government.
25) Reminder of the 1849/1850 Treaty of the Hawaiian Kingdom and the United States of America remains and is a permanent friendship and amity treaty signed by Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli, his heirs and successors and the U.S.A./United States of America and remains the supreme law of the land. Lands are based on the alodio/ano alodial system which is Not the same as the U.S. land system, etc.
This is also a friendly reminder that rents and leases are due, the Royal Families exists, Review of the Alii Trusts are being made, the buildings that have been built prior to the 1893 must be vacated for our Royal Families use, all books, records of the Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii must be returned, stolen monies, treasury amounts, including loans made by Charles Reed Bishop, etc. must be returned, includes the missing monies retrieved from Kawaiahao Church burials which amounts to approximately $27 million, etc.
For the records, I, Amelia Gora, am also one of the heirs/descendants of Mataio Kekuanaoa, who was the heir of Victoria Kamamalu; heir/descendant/successor of Kalola (female) next-of -kin to Bernice Pauahi Bishop on Probate. The trustees, all non kanaka maoli claimed themselves to be the heirs....they too were listed on the Judicial Tribunal list and were all dispossessed. I am also one of the heirs/descendants of John Young and Isaac Davis in two lines. Ramifications are many.
False Flag issues are added to the admission of crimes by the U.S. through Public Law 103-150, including the Judicial Tribunal list which legally, lawfully dispossessed the 556 person/entities according to Rule of Law.
We remain a neutral, friendly, non-violent nation since the time of Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli.
Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli passed the anti-slavery law in 1852, and the U.S. passed theirs in 1865 or 13 years later. The U.S. continues to operate as slave masters/owners and do not own lands in the Hawaiian Islands, and wrongfully collect taxes which is Not O.K. De-occupation is an option to an American Embassy in the Hawaiian Islands.
Sincerely,
Amelia Gora
references:
Nov 3, 2011 - According to the article PARADISE IN THE PACIFIC : * this articleshows ...... The Kingdom of Hawaii's STOLEN monies by the Entity, now known as .... Archives, behind Kawaiahao Church: https://docs.google.com/leaf? id= ...
Sep 17, 2014 - That You Kaohi continue to live on Crimminal Stolen Lands and You ...Kawaiahao Ahupuaa Konohiki Amelia Gora and private persons .... defrauding, criminally assuming lands, monies, etc. not belonging to ... Sep 11, 2011 – see below and other articles/posts/etc. by Amelia Gora --- researcher of the find ...
Jan 30, 2012 - I, Amelia Gora, as one of Kamehaeha's descendants/heirs, ... one of theKawaiahao Ahupuaa Konohiki Family of Kaaha (k), who married .... Sep 11, 2011 – see below and other articles/posts/etc. by Amelia Gora --- researcher of the find ... ourmonies, gold bullions, gold coins were stolen ----even criminal ...
Jan 12, 2012 - Updated 09/01/2013 POLICE REPORT ..27 MILLION STOLEN BY GRAVE ROBBE. ... The Prime suspects are the Kawaiahao Church Minister(s), their Trustees, ... articles (evidence of a gold watch was found in a historical article by a former ... I, Amelia Gora, announced that they need to cease and desist ...
Jan 19, 2015 - Log In Sign Up amelia gora Follow Author, writer, editor of the IOLANI ...Articles/info posted at many forums - including bmj.com /British Medical Journal. aloha. ... It is Not O.K. to utilize monies, lands, mineral rights, water rights of ..... etc.2006 - The following was delivered to the Kawaiahao Church: 2011 ...
Jan 12, 2012 - The Prime suspects are the Kawaiahao Church Minister(s), their Trustees, the ... oral history, articles (evidence of a gold watch was found in a historicalarticle by ... I, Amelia Gora, announced that they need to cease and desist ...
Apr 4, 2015 - In Sai's blog article titled, "State of Hawai'i Judge Rules Hawaiian Kingdom Still Exists ..... the missionaries in 1820 .,,look at Kawaiahao Church......the land does Not belong to ... Stolen monies from a non violent, neutral nation vs. ...Amelia Gora the facts remain is that because the Royal Families exists, the ...
Sep 27, 2015 - Compiled by Researchers including Amelia Gora (2012) ..... at the Mission Houses Archives, behind Kawaiahao Church : https://docs.google.com/leaf? .... The following article was posted in the IOLANI - The Royal Hawk. ...... STOLE our families monies, the Hawaiian Kingdom monies, created the League of ...
Jan 20, 2015 - amelia_gora amelia gora Follow Author, writer, editor of the IOLANI - The Royal ... Articles/info posted at many forums – including bmj.com /British Medical Journal. aloha. ... It is Not O.K. to utilize monies, lands, mineral rights, water rights of ..... Kawaiahao Church Burials – Updates – by Amelia GoraThe ...
Feb 1, 2015 - The Royal Families in the Hawaiian Islands by Amelia Gora (2015) ..... See previous article: Genealogies – Kalaniopuu's, Kamehameha's, Kaumualii's ... It is Not O.K. to utilize monies, lands, mineral rights, water rights of Sovereigns .....Kawaiahao Church Burials – Updates – by Amelia GoraThe following is ...
****
False Flag Hawaii Nei - Add the Hawaiian Kingdom to the list of 53 False Flag Issues
False Flag Attacks In Hawaii
Overview by Amelia Gora (2015)
The following statements came off of the Global Research article:
"Leaders throughout history have acknowledged the danger of false flags:
“A history of false flag attacks used to manipulate the minds of the people! “In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
“Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death”.
– Adolph Hitler
“Why of course the people don’t want war … But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship … Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
– Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.
“The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
– Josef Stalin"
The Admission of Crimes against the Queen and the Hawaiian Kingdom was made by U.S. President William Clinton in 1993, meant to be a mere apology and moved based on the 100th anniversary of the dethronement of our Queen and entered for the records.
In reality, the Apology was an Admission of Crimes and a Record of False Flag Issues documented.
The meaning of False Flag at Wikipedia:
Historically the term "false flag" has its origins in naval warfare where the use of a flag other than the belligerent's true battle flag as a ruse de guerre, before engaging the enemy, has long been accepted [1] but the contemporary terms False flag or black flag describes covert operations that are designed to deceive in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by entities, groups, or nations other than those who actually planned and executed them.
Operations carried out during peace-time by civilian organizations, as well as covert government agencies, may (by extension) be called false flag operations if they seek to hide the real organization behind an operation.
Dr Geraint Hughes uses the term to refer to those acts carried out by "military or security force personnel, which are then blamed on terrorists" [2]; Prof deHaven- Smith argues that the terminology has become looser in recent years due to the increasingly complex levels of "duplicity" and "international intrigue" between states [3] while Peter Dale Scott argues that false flags are methods used by deep states as a form of deep politics. [4][clarification needed] "
The following excerpts from the Public Law 103-150 proving False Flag Issues signed by U.S. President William Clinton:
"Whereas, from 1826 until 1893, the United States recognized the independence of the Kingdom of Hawaii, extended full and complete diplomatic recognition to the Hawaiian Grovernment, and entered into treaties and conventions with the Hawaiian monarchs to govern commerce and navigation in 1826, 1842, 1849, 1875, and 1887;
Whereas the Congregational Church (now known as the United Church of Christ), through its American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, sponsored and sent more than 100 missionaries to the Kingdom of Hawaii between 1820 and 1850;
Whereas, on January 14, 1893, John L. Stevens (hereafter referred to in this Resolution as the "United States Minister"), the United States Minister assigned to the sovereign and independent Kingdom of Hawaii conspired with a small group of non-Hawaiian residents of the Kingdom of Hawaii, including citizens of the United States, to overthrow the indigenous and lawful Government of Hawaii;
Whereas, in pursuance of the conspiracy to overthrow the Government of Hawaii, the United States Minister and the naval representatives of the United States caused armed naval forces of the United States to invade the sovereign Hawaiian nation on January 16, 1893, and to position themselves near the Hawaiian Government buildings and the lolan
Summary
Identifying the False Flag issues challenges the overall legality of entities, includes, Territory of Hawaii, State of Hawaii, Hawaiian Homelands/Homes, DLNR- Department of Land and Natural Resources, OHA/Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Kanaiolowalu, Kau Inoa, Hawaiian Rolls Commission, Nai Aupuni/Na'i Aupuni, etc. created by the United States, State of Hawaii, etc.
The admission of the steps taken and recorded, signed by the U.S. President William Clinton is admission of the False Flag moves in a concerted move by the United States, Navy, and a mesh of American citizens, treasonous Hawaiian Kingdom subjects, et. als.
The desire to claim that there were no legal affects because the word "Whereas" was entered in apology bill is a mere legalese maneuver utilizing words. See discussion at Wikipedia under Apology 103-150
The Facts entered is demonstrative of admitted wrongs utilizing the following methods as documented in the first paragraph:
* false flag attacks used to manipulate the minds of the people! “In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule - ― Friedrich Nietzsche
* “Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death”
- Adolp0h Hitler
* All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
– Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.
* gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
– Josef Stalin"
The False Flag therefore was deliberately engaged in by the United States.
Stress, Duress, Usurpation, Coercion, Intimidation, Terrorism negates all contracts, legally, lawfully, under the Rule of Law.
All moves against the Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii/Ko Hawaii Pae Aina/He Mokupuni Pae Aina o Hawaii/Hawaiian archipelago/Hawaii aka's are now documented as a False Flag maneuver of the United States and the American Empire which is documented in the 1899 Peacock case, HAWAIIAN REPORTS, and .
Informing many because..............
Something STINKS...............(.and I know it's NOT ME) WICKED TO THE MAX!
aloha.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vm1WOqex8jE Liliuo Free
References:
Nov 10, 2007 - Uploaded by Adam Keawe Manalo-Camp
... with excerpts from Public Law 103-150 ("the Apology Bill")passed by the ... they had no right to invade ...
Home / Shows / Documentary /
Hawaii: The stolen paradise
May 19, 2014 08:24
Reuters / Chris WattieReuters / Chris Wattie
56729
The documentary takes us on a journey to revisit the history and origins of Hawaii and its people. How they came to develop an independent civilization globally recognized until the overthrow of the monarchy and the illegal annexation by the United States in 1893.
The Hawaiians believe that during the first few decades of the 20th century the U.S. was devoted to overriding the native language, Hawaiian culture and replace it with tourism. All this as a mask to hide the true goal: to make Hawaii the most important military base of the American empire.
The U.S. claims she has legally annexed Hawaii as its 50th state. But there are many conflicting views when it comes to this. In 1993 President Bill Clinton signed a joint resolution of Congress in which he literally, “acknowledges that the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii occurred with the active participation of agents and citizens of the U.S., and also recognizes that Native Hawaiians never they gave up their sovereign rights and national people.”
Due to copyright restrictions, this video can only be viewed on RT’s live feed. Time of broadcast is available on RT’s schedule page
my comment posted:
Premeditation to take over the Hawaiian Kingdom is documented, lots of treasonous, pirate activities by Americans supported by the U.S. and masquerading as Hawaiian subjects. The Hawaiian government is made up of three (3) parts and those in the vote in part, a temporary part were the ones who dethroned our Queen....conspiracies documented...we have formed a Tribunal to make corrections because the 1850 Treaty of the Hawaiian Kingdom and the United States of America was approved by Congress....btw did you know the Americans put Queen Liliuokalani back on the throne to make her Queen for a day in 1915? They are truly wicked.... feasting off of the goodness of our neutral, friendly, non-violent nation while the World is now becoming aware of the genocide issues being exposed....such as pulling out kanaka maoli's tongues, beaten, killed, thrown in the leprosy colony to assume lands from the Royal families, etc........the criminal assumption of monies belonging to our Royal families is Not O.K..... especially since the purpose is to WAR with nations......truly wicked...signing off as the Acting Liaison of Foreign Affairs - Amelia Gora - Royal Family memb er, House of Nobles, Tribunal member, Hawaiian Genealogical Society member........aloha. website: theiolani.blogspot.com or google my name for the hundreds of thousands of articles for your information......
The documentary takes us on a journey to revisit the history and origins of Hawaii and its people.
The following are the 53 False Flag Issues recently posted at the Washington Post, Global websites:
53 Admitted False Flag Attacks
Global Research, February 24, 2015
Not Theory … Admitted Fact
There are many documented false flag attacks, where a government carries out a terror attack … and then falsely blames its enemy for political purposes.
In the following 42 instances, officials in the government which carried out the attack (or seriously proposed an attack) admits to it, either orally or in writing:
(1) Japanese troops set off a small explosion on a train track in 1931, and falsely blamed it on China in order to justify an invasion of Manchuria. This is known as the “Mukden Incident” or the “Manchurian Incident”. The Tokyo International Military Tribunal found: “Several of the participators in the plan, including Hashimoto [a high-ranking Japanese army officer], have on various occasions admitted their part in the plot and have stated that the object of the ‘Incident’ was to afford an excuse for the occupation of Manchuria by the Kwantung Army ….” And see this.
(2) A major with the Nazi SS admitted at the Nuremberg trials that – under orders from the chief of the Gestapo – he and some other Nazi operatives faked attacks on their own people and resources which they blamed on the Poles, to justify the invasion of Poland.
(3) Nazi general Franz Halder also testified at the Nuremberg trials that Nazi leader Hermann Goering admitted to setting fire to the German parliament building in 1933, and then falsely blaming the communists for the arson.
(4) Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev admitted in writing that the Soviet Union’s Red Army shelled the Russian village of Mainila in 1939 – while blaming the attack on Finland – as a basis for launching the “Winter War” against Finland. Russian president Boris Yeltsin agreed that Russia had been the aggressor in the Winter War.
(5) The Russian Parliament, current Russian president Putin and former Soviet leader Gorbachev all admit that Soviet leader Joseph Stalin ordered his secret police to execute 22,000 Polish army officers and civilians in 1940, and falsely blame it on the Nazis.
(6) The British government admits that – between 1946 and 1948 – it bombed 5 ships carrying Jews attempting to flee the Holocaust to seek safety in Palestine, set up a fake group called “Defenders of Arab Palestine”, and then had the psuedo-group falsely claim responsibility for the bombings (and see this, thisand this).
(7) Israel admits that in 1954, an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind “evidence” implicating the Arabs as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers, and several of the Israelis later confessed) (and see this and this).
(8) The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950′s to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister.
(9) The Turkish Prime Minister admitted that the Turkish government carried out the 1955 bombing on a Turkish consulate in Greece – also damaging the nearby birthplace of the founder of modern Turkey – and blamed it on Greece, for the purpose of inciting and justifying anti-Greek violence.
(10) The British Prime Minister admitted to his defense secretary that he and American president Dwight Eisenhower approved a plan in 1957 to carry out attacks in Syria and blame it on the Syrian government as a way to effect regime change.
(11-21) The former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence admit that NATO, with the help of the Pentagon and CIA, carried out terror bom.... As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: “You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent peo... (and see this) (Italy and other European countries subject to the terror campaign had joined NATO before the bombings occurred). And watch this BBC special. They also allegedly carried out terror attacks in France, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, Norway,..., and other countries. False flag attacks carried out pursuant tho this program include – by way of example only – the murder of the Turkish Prime Minister (1960), bombings in Portugal (....
(22) In 1960, American Senator George Smathers suggested that the U.S. launch “a false attack made on Guantanamo Bay which would give us the excuse of actually fomenting a fight which would then give us the excuse to go in and [overthrow Castro]“.
(23) Official State Department documents show that, in 1961, the head of the Joint Chiefs and other high-level officials discussed blowing up a consulate in the Dominican Republic in order to justify an invasion of that country. The plans were not carried out, but they were all discussed as serious proposals.
(24) As admitted by the U.S. government, recently declassified documents show that in 1962, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. See the following ABC news report; the official documents; and watch this interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC’s World News Tonight with Peter Jennings.
(25) In 1963, the U.S. Department of Defense wrote a paper promoting attacks on nations within the Organization of American States – such as Trinidad-Tobago or Jamaica – and then falsely blaming them on Cuba.
(26) The U.S. Department of Defense even suggested covertly paying a person in the Castro government to attack the United States: “The only area remaining for consideration then would be to bribe one of Castro’s subordinate commanders to initiate an attack on Guantanamo.”
(27) The NSA admits that it lied about what really happened in the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964 … manipulating data to make it look like North Vietnamese boats fired on a U.S. ship so as to create a false justification for the Vietnam war.
(28) A U.S. Congressional committee admitted that – as part of its “Cointelpro” campaign – the FBI had used many provocateurs in the 1950s through 1970s to carry out violent acts and falsely blame them on political activists.
(29) A top Turkish general admitted that Turkish forces burned down a mosque on Cyprus in the 1970s and blamed it on their enemy. He explained: “In Special War, certain acts of sabotage are staged and blamed on the enemy to increase public resistance. We did this on Cyprus; we even burnt down a mosque.” In response to the surprised correspondent’s incredulous look the general said, “I am giving an example”.
(30) The German government admitted (and see this) that, in 1978, the German secret service detonated a bomb in the outer wall of a prison and planted “escape tools” on a prisoner – a member of the Red Army Faction – which the secret service wished to frame the bombing on.
(31) A Mossad agent admits that, in 1984, Mossad planted a radio transmitter in Gaddaffi’s compound in Tripoli, Libya which broadcast fake terrorist trasmissions recorded by Mossad, in order to frame Gaddaffi as a terrorist supporter. Ronald Reagan bombed Libya immediately thereafter.
(32) The South African Truth and Reconciliation Council found that, in 1989, the Civil Cooperation Bureau (a covert branch of the South African Defense Force) approached an explosives expert and asked him “to participate in an operation aimed at discrediting the ANC [the African National Congress] by bombing the police vehicle of the investigating officer into the murder incident”, thus framing the ANC for the bombing.
(33) An Algerian diplomat and several officers in the Algerian army admit that, in the 1990s, the Algerian army frequently massacred Algerian civilians and then blamed Islamic militants for the killings (and see this video; and Agence France-Presse, 9/27/2002, French Court Dismisses Algerian Defamation Suit Against Author).
(34) The United States Army’s 1994 publication Special Forces Foreign Internal Defense Tactics Techniques and Procedures for Special Forces – updated in 2004 – recommends employing terrorists and using false flag operations to destabilize leftist regimes in Latin America. False flag terrorist attacks were carried out in Latin America and other regions as part of the CIA’s “ Dirty Wars“. And see this.
(36) Senior Russian Senior military and intelligence officers admit that the KGB blew up Russian apartment buildings in 1999 and falsely blamed it on Chechens, in order to justify an invasion of Chechnya (and see this report and this discussion).
(37) According to the Washington Post, Indonesian police admit that the Indonesian military killed American teachers in Papua in 2002 and blamed the murders on a Papuan separatist group in order to get that group listed as a terrorist organization.
(38) The well-respected former Indonesian president also admits that the government probably had a role in the Bali bombings.
(39) As reported by BBC, the New York Times, and Associated Press, Macedonian officials admit that the government murdered 7 innocent immigrants in cold blood and pretended that they were Al Qaeda soldiers attempting to assassinate Macedonian police, in order to join the “war on terror”.
(40) Senior police officials in Genoa, Italy admitted that – in July 2001, at the G8 summit in Genoa – planted two Molotov cocktails and faked the stabbing of a police officer, in order to justify a violent crackdown against protesters.
(41) The U.S. falsely blamed Iraq for playing a role in the 9/11 attacks – as shown by a memo from the defense secretary – as one of the main justifications for launching the Iraq war. Even after the 9/11 Commission admitted that there was no connection, Dick Cheney said that the evidence is “overwhelming” that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein’s regime, that Cheney “probably” had information unavailable to the Commission, and that the media was not ‘doing their homework’ in reporting such ties. Top U.S. government officials now admit that the Iraq war was really launched for oil … not 9/11 or weapons of mass destruction. Despite previous “lone wolf” claims, many U.S. government officials now say that 9/11 was state-sponsored terror; but Iraq was not the state which backed the hijackers. (Many U.S. officials have alleged that 9/11 was a false flag operation by rogue elements of the U.S. government.).
(43) Former Department of Justice lawyer John Yoo suggested in 2005 that the US should go on the offensive against al-Qaeda, having “our intelligence agencies create a false terrorist organization. It could have its own websites, recruitment centers, training camps, and fundraising operations. It could launch fake terrorist operations and claim credit for real terrorist strikes, helping to sow confusion within al-Qaeda’s ranks, causing operatives to doubt others’ identities and to question the validity of communications.”
(44) United Press International reported in June 2005:
U.S. intelligence officers are reporting that some of the insurgents in Iraq are using recent-model Beretta 92 pistols, but the pistols seem to have had their serial numbers erased. The numbers do not appear to have been physically removed; the pistols seem to have come off a production line without any serial numbers. Analysts suggest the lack of serial numbers indicates that the weapons were intended for intelligence operations or terrorist cells with substantial government backing. Analysts speculate that these guns are probably from either Mossad or the CIA. Analysts speculate that agent provocateurs may be using the untraceable weapons even as U.S. authorities use insurgent attacks against civilians as evidence of the illegitimacy of the resistance.
(45) Undercover Israeli soldiers admitted in 2005 to throwing stones at other Israeli soldiers so they could blame it on Palestinians, as an excuse to crack down on peaceful protests by the Palestinians.
(46) Quebec police admitted that, in 2007, thugs carrying rocks to a peaceful protest were actually undercover Quebec police officers (and see this).
(47) At the G20 protests in London in 2009, a British member of parliament saw plain clothes police officers attempting to incite the crowd to violence.
(48) Egyptian politicians admitted (and see this) that government employees looted priceless museum artifacts in 2011 to try to discredit the protesters.
(49) A Colombian army colonel has admitted that his unit murdered 57 civilians, then dressed them in uniforms and claimed they were rebels killed in combat.
(50) The highly-respected writer for the Telegraph Ambrose Evans-Pritchard says that the head of Saudi intelligence – Prince Bandar – recently admitted that the Saudi government controls “Chechen” terrorists.
(51) High-level American sources admitted that the Turkish government – a fellow NATO country – carried out the chemical weapons attacks blamed on the Syrian government; and high-ranking Turkish government admitted on tape plans to carry out attacks and blame it on the Syrian government.
(52) The former Ukrainian security chief admits that the sniper attacks which started the Ukrainian coup were carried out in order to frame others.
(53) Britain’s spy agency has admitted (and see this) that it carries out “digital false flag” attacks on targets, framing people by writing offensive or unlawful material … and blaming it on the target.
So Common … There’s a Name for It
The use of the bully’s trick is so common that it was given a name hundreds of years ago.
“False flag terrorism” is defined as a government attacking its own people, then blaming others in order to justify going to war against the people it blames. Or as Wikipedia defines it:
False flag operations are covert operations conducted by governments, corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to appear as if they are being carried out by other entities. The name is derived from the military concept of flying false colors; that is, flying the flag of a country other than one’s own. False flag operations are not limited to war and counter-insurgency operations, and have been used in peace-time; for example, during Italy’s strategy of tension.
The term comes from the old days of wooden ships, when one ship would hang the flag of its enemy before attacking another ship. Because the enemy’s flag, instead of the flag of the real country of the attacking ship, was hung, it was called a “false flag” attack.
Indeed, this concept is so well-accepted that rules of engagement for naval, air and land warfare all prohibit false flag attacks.
Leaders Throughout History Have Acknowledged False Flags
Leaders throughout history have acknowledged the danger of false flags:
“A history of false flag attacks used to manipulate the minds of the people! “In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
“Terrorism is the best political weapon for nothing drives people harder than a fear of sudden death”.
– Adolph Hitler
“Why of course the people don’t want war … But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship … Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
– Hermann Goering, Nazi leader.
“The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.
– Josef Stalin
In 1993 President Bill Clinton signed a joint resolution of Congress in which he literally, “acknowledges that the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii occurred ...
Jan 6, 2015 - researched and compiled by Amelia Gora (2015), one of ... non-violent nation called the Hawaiian Kingdom/Kingdom of Hawaii/Ko Hawaii Pae Aina/He ....civilization globally recognized until the overthrow of the monarchy and the ...Premeditation to take over the Hawaiian Kingdom is documented, lots of ...
You've visited this page 2 times. Last visit: 7/15/15
Nov 24, 2012 - By Amelia Gora (about the author) Permalink ... PREMEDITATION IN THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS: ... 's landing force on duty at the Arlington Hotel, Honolulu, at the time of the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy, January 1893.
You've visited this page 5 times. Last visit: 5/20/14
Oct 13, 2013 - 2 posts - 1 author
Note: I, Amelia Gora, am one of the descendants of Kalola who was the 'next of ...Concerted effort made to assume the Hawaiian Kingdom by the U.S., ... such as thePremeditation activities, the Tampered Genealogies, the ...
You've visited this page many times. Last visit: 10/30/15
Jul 26, 2012 - 13 posts - 1 author
Jun 7, 2012 – Diary: The Hawaiian Kingdom Is a Neutral, Non-violent, ..... Honolulu, at the time of the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy, January 1893. ..... Amelia GoraPermalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Tuesday: Delete .
May 25, 2012 - 9 posts - 1 author
Plots to assume the Hawaiian Government documented --- Benjamin ..... at the time of the overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy, January 1893.
Nov 3, 2011 - Pertains to the Americans in the Kingdom of Hawaii: .... whereby the constitutional government was overthrown, and, finally, an ..... Comments/notes: Recent research shows that premeditation of dethroning our Queen in 1893 ...
You've visited this page 5 times. Last visit: 8/19/15
2 days ago - 2015- 0925 Re: Palmyra Islands Finds from Amelia Gora, Acting Liaison of ..... to the U.S. Government who did Premeditate to take over a neutral, .... tooverthrow and take control of the Kingdom of Hawaii for the purpose of ...
Jun 25, 2014 - Many want the Hawaiian monarchy restored to power and the U.S. government out of Hawaii. ... negotiated directly with the Kingdom of Hawaii since it wasoverthrown in 1893, the Interior statement said. .... amelia gora ... fraud, conspiracies,premeditation, terrorist activities, genocide, and documented as ...
Sep 17, 2014 - Long Live The Hawaiian Kingdom ....... o Pomai… ... and U.S. Presidents who premeditated the move to assume lands, assets of ... Kahana Ahupuaa Konohiki Amelia Gora, and other private persons as Konohiki and assistants...... See More Overthrow: America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to ...
-
Replies to This Discussion
 Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Saturday
107 STAT. 1510 PUBLIC LAW 103-150—NOV. 23, 1993 Public Law 103-150 103d Congress Joint Resolution Nov 23 1993 "^^ acknowledge the 100th anniversary of the Jtinuary 17, 1893 overthrow of the ' Kingdom of Hawaii, and to offer an apology to Native Hawaiians on behalf [S.J. Res. 19] of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii. Whereas, prior to the arrival of the first Europeans in 1778, the Native Hawaiian people lived in a highly organized, self-sufficient, subsistent social system based on communal land tenure with a sophisticated language, culture, and religion; Whereas a unified monarchical government of the Hawaiian Islands was established in 1810 under Kamehameha I, the first King of Hawaii; Whereas, from 1826 until 1893, the United States recognized the independence of the Kingdom of Hawaii, extended full and complete diplomatic recognition to the Hawaiian Grovernment, and entered into treaties and conventions with the Hawaiian monarchs to govern commerce and navigation in 1826, 1842, 1849, 1875, and 1887; Whereas the Congregational Church (now known as the United Church of Christ), through its American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, sponsored and sent more than 100 missionaries to the Kingdom of Hawaii between 1820 and 1850; Whereas, on January 14, 1893, John L. Stevens (hereafter referred to in this Resolution as the "United States Minister"), the United States Minister assigned to the sovereign and independent Kingdom of Hawaii conspired with a small group of non-Hawaiian residents of the Kingdom of Hawaii, including citizens of the United States, to overthrow the indigenous and lawful Government of Hawaii; Whereas, in pursuance of the conspiracy to overthrow the Government of Hawaii, the United States Minister and the naval representatives of the United States caused armed naval forces of the United States to invade the sovereign Hawaiian nation on January 16, 1893, and to position themselves near the Hawaiian Government buildings and the lolani Palace to intimidate Queen Liliuokalani and her Government; Whereas, on the afternoon of January 17, 1893, a Committee of Safety that represented the American and European sugar planters, descendents of missionaries, and financiers deposed the Hawaiian monarchy and proclaimed the establishment of a Provisional Grovemment; Whereas the United States Minister thereupon extended diplomatic recognition to the Provisional Government that was formed by the conspirators without the consent of the Native Hawaiian PUBLIC LAW 103-150—NOV. 23, 1993 107 STAT. 1511 people or the lawful iGrovemment of Hawaii and in violation of treaties between the two nations and of international law; Whereas, soon thereafter, when informed of the risk of bloodshed with resistance, Queen Liliuokalani issued the following statement yielding her authority to the United States Government rather than to the Provisional Government: "I Liliuokalani, by the Grace of Grod and under the Constitution of the Hawaiian Kingdom, Queen, do hereby solemnly protest against any and all acts done against myself and the Constitutional Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom by certain persons claiming to have established a Provisional Government of and for this Kingdom. "That I yield to the superior force of the United States of America whose Minister Plenipotentiary, His Excellency John L. Stevens, has caused United States troops to be landed at Honolulu and declared that he would support the Provisional Government. "Now to avoid any collision of armed forces, and perhaps the loss of life, I do this under protest and impelled by said force yield my authority until such time as the Government of the United States shall, upon facts being presented to it, undo the action of its representatives and reinstate me in the authority which I claim as the Constitutional Sovereign of the Hawaiian Islands.". Done at Honolulu this 17th day of January, A.D, 1893.; Whereas, without the active support and intervention by the United States diplomatic and military representatives, the insurrection against the Government of Queen Liliuokalani would have failed for lack of popular support and insufficient arms; Whereas, on February 1, 1893, the United States Minister rsiised the American flag and proclaimed Hawaii to be a protectorate of the United States; Whereas the report of a Presidentially established investigation conducted by former Congressman James Blount into the events surrounding the insurrection and overthrow of January 17, 1893, concluded that the United States diplomatic and military representatives had abused their authority £ind were responsible for the change in government; Whereas, as a result of this investigation, the United States Minister to Hawaii was recalled from his diplomatic post and the military commander of the United States armed forces stationed in Hawaii was disciplined and forced to resign his commission; Whereas, in a message to Congress on December 18, 1893, President Grover Cleveland reported fully and accurately on the illegal acts of the conspirators, described such acts as an "act of war, committed with the participation of a diplomatic representative of the United States and without authority of Congress", and acknowledged that by such acts the government of a peaceful and friendly people was overthrown; Whereas President Cleveland further concluded that a "substantial wrong has thus been done which a due regard for our national character as well as the rights of the injured people requires we should endeavor to repair" and called for the restoration of the Hawaiian monarchy; Whereas the Provisional Government protested President Cleveland's call for the restoration of the monarchy and continued to hold state power and pursue Emiuexation to the United States; Whereas the Provisional Government successfully lobbied the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate (hereafter referred 107 STAT. 1512 PUBLIC LAW 103-150—NOV. 23, 1993 to in this Resolution as the "Committee") to conduct a new investigation into the events surrounding the overthrow of the monarchy; Whereas the Committee and its chairman, Senator John Morgan, conducted hearings in Washington, D.C., from December 27, 1893, through February 26, 1894, in which members of the Provisional Grovernment justified and condoned the actions of the United States Minister and recommended annexation of Hawaii; Whereas, although the Provisional Government was able to obscure the role of the United States in the illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy, it was unable to rally the support from two-thirds of the Senate needed to ratify a treaty of annexation; Whereas, on July 4, 1894, the Provisional Government declared itself to be the Republic of Hawaii; Whereas, on January 24, 1895, while imprisoned in lolani Palace, Queen Liliuokalani was forced by representatives of the RepubHc of Hawaii to officially abdicate her throne; Whereas, in the 1896 United States Presidential election, William McKinley replaced Grover Cleveland; Whereas, on July 7,1898, as a consequence of the Spanish-American War, President McKinley signed the Newlands Joint Resolution that provided for the annexation of Hawaii; Whereas, through the Newlands Resolution, the self-declared Republic of Hawaii ceded sovereignty over the Hawaiian Islands to the United States; Whereas the Republic of Hawaii also ceded 1,800,000 acres of crown, government and public lands of the Kingdom of Hawaii, without the consent of or compensation to the Native Hawaiian people of Hawaii or their sovereign government; Wnereas the Congress, through the Newlands Resolution, ratified the cession, annexed Hawaii as part of the United States, and vested title to the lands in Hawaii in the United States; Whereas the Newlands Resolution also specified that treaties existing between Hawaii and foreign nations were to immediately cease and be replaced by United States treaties with such nations; Whereas the Newlands Resolution effected the transaction between the Republic of Hawaii and the United States Government; Whereas the indigenous Hawaiian people never directly relinquished their claims to their inherent sovereignty as a people or over their national lands to the United States, either through their monarchy or through a plebiscite or referendum; Whereas, on April 30, 1900, President McKinley signed the Organic Act that provided a government for the territory of Hawaii and defined the political structure and powers of the newly established Territorial Government and its relationship to the United States; Whereas, on August 21, 1959, Hawaii became the 50th State of the United States; Whereas the health and well-being of the Native Hawaiian people is intrinsically tied to their deep feehngs and attachment to the land; Whereas the long-range economic and social changes in Hawaii over the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries have been devastating to the population and to the health and well-being of the Hawaiian people; Whereas the Native Hawaiian people are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territory, and their cultural identity in accordance with their own PUBLIC LAW 103-150—NOV. 23, 1993 107 STAT. 1513 spiritual and traditional beliefs, customs, practices, language, and social institutions; Whereas, in order to promote racial harmony and cultural understanding, the Legislature of the State of Hawaii has determined that the year 1993 should serve Hawaii as a year of special reflection on the rights and dignities of the Native Hawaiians in the Hawsdian and the American societies; Whereas the Eighteenth Greneral Synod of the United Church of Christ in recognition of the denomination's historical complicity in the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii in 1893 directed the Ofi&ce of the President of the United Church of Christ to offer a pubUc apology to the Native Hawaiian people and to initiate the process of reconciliation between the United Church of Christ and the Native Hawaiians; and Whereas it is proper and timely for the Congress on the occasion of the impending one hundredth anniversary of the event, to acknowledge the historic significance of the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, to express its deep regret to the Native Hawaiian people, and to support the reconciliation efforts of the State of Hawaii and the United Church of Christ with Native Hawaiians: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND APOLOGY. The Congress— (1) on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on January 17, 1893, acknowledges the historical significance of this event which resulted in the suppression of the inherent sovereignty of the Native Hawaiian people; (2) recognizes and commends efforts of reconciliation initiated by the State of Hawaii and the United Church of Christ with Native Hawaiians; (3) apologizes to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the people of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on January 17, 1893 with the participation of agents and citizens of the United States, and the deprivation of the rights of Native Hawaiians to self-determination; (4) expresses its commitment to acknowledge the ramifications of the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, in order to provide a proper foundation for reconciliation between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people; and (5) urges the President of the United States to also acknowledge the ramifications of the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii and to support reconciliation efforts between the United States and the Native Hawaiian people. SEC. 2. DEFINmONS. As used in this Joint Resolution, the term "Native Hawaiian" means any individual who is a descendent of the aboriginal people who, prior to 1778, occupied and exercised sovereignty in the area that now constitutes the State of Hawaii. 107 STAT. 1514 PUBLIC LAW 103-150—NOV. 23, 1993 SEC. 3. DISCLAIMER. Nothing in this Joint Resolution is intended to serve as a settlement of any claims against the United States. Approved November 23, 1993.
-
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Saturday
Current False Flag Operations:
The reconnaissance service of Donetsk People’s Republic has detected redeployment of Ukrainian army’s combat helicopters, artillery and tanks to the conflict zone near Gorlovka, DPR defense spokesman Eduard Basurin told a briefing on Tuesday. Two squadrons of combat helicopters arrived to the Konstantinovka settlement. Presence of battle tanks and artillery were observed in the Zhovanka and Novoselovka settlements.
-
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Saturday
US-NATO-Israel are state sponsors of terrorism, providing training, weapons and money to various terrorist formations.
The US led war against the Islamic State is a big lie. Going after ”Islamic terrorists” is used to justify a military agenda. The Islamic State is a creation of US…
-
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Saturday
Angela Foster Why France?
1. France has recently reveled it will not be signing the controversial TTIP agreement.
2. France openly supports Palestine and their move towards independent statehood
3. France recently stepped up their military presence in Syria, as part a US-led coalition. (take note: " US-led")
4. France also openly criticizes Russia's involvement in the middle eastern region.
5. They recently decided to reconsider selling the mistral war ships back to Russia
6. ISIS are a creation of The West and her allies, used as a tool to instill fear and division among the people. Promoting disharmony and instability around the globe. They are just another Taliban or Al-Qaeda.
A J MacDonald Jr Syria was given to France after WW I and the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire. Syria later gained independence, but France, UK, and US want a puppet government there now.
Joan W. Sertino A Gladio operation (PsyOp) by NATO mercenaries to continue the MILITARIZATION of Europe, the ultimate purpose being RUSSIA.
Joan W. Sertino A Gladio operation (PsyOp) by NATO mercenaries to manufacture your consent for additional NATO "interventions" in Syria, and ultimately Ukraine and Russia, to KEEP the petrodollar. Because of the recent SAUDI-RUSSO RAPPROCHEMENT (see Below), because Er...See More
-
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Saturday
Are You Sleeping? (Frère Jacques) | Family Sing Along - Muffin Songs
-
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Saturday
- 7 years ago
- 337,434 views
R.I.P. Nicole. LYRICS: It's gonna take a lotta love - To change the way things are It's gonna take a lotta love - Or we won't get too ...
La La La La La La La La La Ooh, Ooh It's gonna take a lotta love To change the way things are. It's gonna take a lotta love Or we ...
-
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Saturday
-
-
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Saturday
Comments
Rosly Garcon While this is funny..... make no mistake, Obama is doing exactly what he was sent to do!?
Tony Hardy We always were, just people didn't know. Rome went to europe, then to America, the Crown OWN America, and Europe.
Tony Hardy We are controlled thru the 3 most powerful city states in the world. 1 The City of London(finance), tax free sovereign city state, not a part of London or England. 2 Washington DC(military), tax free sovereign city state, not a part of the United State...See More
-
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Saturday
Ruoho P Esa when come day when usa burning? soon I hope
Devayne Gill and when it dose you scum i hope your on fire puck
Craig Ringness replied · 1 Reply
-
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Saturday
TIME TO PURGE THE FRIEND LIST
As we mourn the tragic deaths in Paris including the POTUS, a few insensitive people seem to use it callously to vet their political views and blame Obama for the terrorist attack. Seven years of slamming him is enough….shit has to stop. Aloha means goodbye as I unfriend some of your dumb asses to the moon. Vent n rant someplace else. Cheers
-
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Saturday
Comments
Marie Kwiatkowski I so agree with you Val K. Ching Jr. Enough already! I've slowly been doing the same thing, even friends I have known all my life. Not easy to do, but as that old saying has always gone "Life is too short" I finally realize what it means.......
Marsha Erickson When we went into Afghanistan in 2002, I knew it then: 3 generations (at least) of warfare. If there's anyone to "blame," it wouldn't be Obama.
Cher Pendarvis Prayers for love and peace. Thank you for your posts, which we always look forward to. Me ke Aloha, Cher and Steve
-
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Sunday
Prosecution?
1) Treaty
FALSE FLAGS, COVERT OPERATIONS AND PROPAGANDA - First Edition
David Satterstated, during his testimony in the United States House of Representatives, "With Yeltsin and his family facing possible criminal prosecution,
Note: The Spanish American War of 1898 is covered, etc.
Aug 28, 2013 - Uploaded by Noam Chomsky Videos
Howard Zinn - Hidden History of The American Working Class - 58 min, 1992 In 1992, labor historian ...
In the book, Zinn seeks to present American history through the eyes of the ... [hide]. 1 Overview. 1.1 Columbus to independence; 1.2 Independence to the ...
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist exposes the secret history of racial cleansing in United States. ... Those words—-or ones just as ominous—-have echoed through the past hundred years of American history ... 2015 The Zinn Education Project
... States, 1492-Present. By Howard Zinn ..... disclosing those hidden episodes of the past when, even if in brief flashes, people showed their ability to resist, .... Edmund Morgan writes, in his history of early Virginia, American. Slavery, American ...
Collective Courage: A History of African American Cooperative Economic Thought and Practice ... —Howard Zinn, author, A People's History of the United States.
Library Journal calls Howard Zinn's iconic A People's History of the United States “a ...+. Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong. + ..... Its like reading the untold story of the history of the United States.
Oct 11, 2013 - Source: Howard Zinn's People's History of the United States; Third ....Cargo: The Forgotten History of Britain's White Slaves in America by Don ...
For the Common Defense: A Military History of the United States of America. New York: Free Press, 1994. Peters, Gerhard, ed. The Presidency: A to Z. 4th ed.
Multi-million-copy bestselling historian Kenneth C. Davis sets his sights on war stories in THE HIDDEN HISTORY OF AMERICA AT WAR. In prose that will ...
*********************
The Hawaiian Kingdom vs. the United States of America
SLAVERY: The Hawaiian Kingdom vs. the United States of America
Review by Amelia Gora (2015)
The following excerpts are from a PDF available from Dr. Zinn......the Notes are mines and highlighted:
Some born in slavery acted out the unfulfilled desire of millions. Frederick Douglass, a slave, sent to Baltimore to work as a servant and as a laborer in the shipyard, somehow learned to read and write, and at twenty-one, in the year 1838, escaped to the North, where he became the most famous black man of his time, as lecturer, newspaper editor, writer. In his autobiography, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglas, he recalled his first childhood thoughts about his condition: Why am I a slave? Why are some people slaves, and others masters? Was there ever a time when this was not so? How did the relation commence? Once, however, engaged in the inquiry, I was not very long in finding out the true solution of the matter. It was not color, but crime, not God, but man, that afforded the true explanation of the existence of slavery; nor was I long in finding out another important truth, viz: what man can make, man can unmake. .. . I distinctly remember being, even then, most strongly impressed with the idea of being a free man some clay. This cheering assurance was an inborn dream of my human nature-a constant menace to slavery-and one which all the powers of slavery were unable to silence or extinguish. The Fugitive Slave Act passed in 1850 was a concession to the southern states in return for the admission of the Mexican war territories (California, especially) into the Union as nonslave states. The Act made it easy for slaveowners to recapture ex-slaves or simply to pick up blacks they claimed had run away. Northern blacks organized resistance to the Fugitive Slave Act, denouncing President Fillmore, who signed it, and Senator Daniel Webster, who supported it. One of these was J. W. Loguen, son of a slave mother and her white owner. He had escaped to freedom on his master's horse, gone to college, and was now a minister in Syracuse, New York. He spoke to a meeting in that city in 1850: The time has come to change the tones of submission into tones of defiance-and to tell Mr. Fillmore and Mr. Webster, if they propose to execute this measure upon us, to send on their blood-hounds. ... I received my freedom from Heaven, and with it came the command to defend my title to it. ... I don't respect this law-I don't fear it-I won't obey it! It outlaws me, and I outlaw it.... I will not live a slave, and if force is employed to re-enslave me, I shall make preparations to meet the crisis as becomes a man. ... Your decision tonight in favor of resistance will give vent to the spirit of liberty, and it will break the bands of party, and shout for joy all over the North. ... Heaven knows that this act of noble daring will break out somewhere-and may God grant that Syracuse be the honored spot, whence it shall send an earthquake voice through the land! The following year, Syracuse had its chance. A runaway slave named Jerry was captured and put on trial. A crowd used crowbars and a battering ram to break into the courthouse, defying marshals with drawn guns, and set Jerry free. Loguen made his home in Syracuse a major station on the Underground Railroad. It was said that he helped 1,500 slaves on their way to Canada. His memoir of slavery came to the attention of his former mistress, and she wrote to him, asking him either to return or to send her $1,000 in compensation. Loguen's reply to her was printed in the abolitionist newspaper, The Liberator: Mrs. Sarah Logue. .. . You say you have offers to buy me, and that you shall sell me if I do not send you $1000, and in the same breath and almost in the same sentence, you say, "You know we raised you as we did our own children." Woman, did you raise your own children for the market? Did you raise them for the whipping post? Did you raise them to be driven off, bound to a coffle in chains? . .. Shame on you! But you say T am a thief, because I took the old mare along with me. Have you got to learn that I had a better right to the old mare, as you call her, than Manasseth Logue had to me? Is it a greater sin for me to steal his horse, than it was for him to rob my mother's cradle, and steal me? . .. Have you got to learn that human rights are mutual and reciprocal, and if you take my liberty and life, you forfeit your own liberty and life? Before God and high heaven, is there a law for one man which is not a law for every other man? If you or any other speculator on my body and rights, wish to know how I regard my rights, they need but come here, and lay their hands on me to enslave me.. . . Yours, etc. J. W. Loguen Frederick Dotiglass knew that the shame of slavery was not just the South's, that the whole nation was complicit in it. On the Fourth of July, 1852, he gave an Independence Day address: Fellow Citizens: Pardon me, and allow me to ask, why am I called upon to speak here today? What have I or those I represent to do with your national independence? Are the great principles of political freedom and of natural justice, embodied in that Declaration of Independence, extended to us? And am I, therefore, called upon to bring our humble offering to the national altar, and to confess the benefits, and express devout gratitude for the blessings resulting from your independence to us?.. . What to the American slave is your Fourth of July? I answer, a day that reveals to him more than all other days of the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. 'In him your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciation of tyrants, brass-fronted impudence; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are to him mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy-a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation of the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of these United States at this very hour. Go where you may, search where you will, roam through all the monarchies and despotisms of the Old World, travel through South America, search out every abuse and when you have found the last, lay your facts by the side of the everyday practices of this nation, and you will say with me that, for revolting barbarity and shameless hypocrisy, America reigns without a rival... . Ten years after Nat Turner's rebellion, there was no sign of black insurrection in the South. But that year, 1841, one incident took place which kept alive the idea of rebellion. Slaves being transported on a ship, the Creole, overpowered the crew, killed one of them, and sailed into the British West Indies (where slavery had been abolished in 1833).
Note: British West Indies was a progressive nation.
England refused to return the slaves (there was much agitation in England against American slavery), and this led to angry talk in Congress of war with England, encouraged by Secretary of State Daniel Webster. The Colored Peoples Press denounced Webster's "bullying position," and, recalling the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812, wrote: If war be declared . .. Will we fight in defense of a government which denies us the most precious right of citizenship? .. . The States in which we dwell have twice availed themselves of our voluntary services, and have repaid us with chains and slavery. Shall we a third time kiss the foot that crushes us? If so, we deserve our chains.
Note:
1841 - Anti Slavery Society formed in Hawaii
1849/50 Treaty of the Hawaiian Kingdom and the United States of America was signed.
1852 - Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli passed the Anti-Slavery law. See SLAVERY Prohibited 12 4
"Slavery under no circumstances whatever, be tolerated in the Hawaiian Islands; whenever a slave shall enter the Hawaiian territory he shall be free; no person who imports a slave. or slaves. into the King's dominions shall ever enjoy any civil or political rights in this realm; but involuntary servitude for the punishment of crime is allowable according to law."
As the tension grew, North and South, blacks became more militant. Frederick Douglass spoke in 1857: Let me give you a word of the philosophy of reforms. The whole history of the progress of human liberty shows that all concessions yet made to her august claims have been born of struggle. ... If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. The struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will... . There were tactical differences between Douglass and William Lloyd Garrison, white abolitionist and editor of The Liberator-differences between black and white abolitionists in general. Blacks were more willing to engage in armed insurrection, hut also more ready to use existing political devices-the ballot box, the Constitution-anything to further their cause. They were not as morally absolute in their tactics as the Garrisonians. Moral pressure would not do it alone, the blacks knew; it would take all sorts of tactics, from elections to rebellion. How ever-present in the minds of northern Negroes was the question of slavery is shown by black children in a Cincinnati school, a private school financed by Negroes. The children were responding to the question "What do you think most about?" Only five answers remain in the records, and all refer to slavery. A seven-year-old child wrote: Dear schoolmates, we are going next summer to buy a farm and to work part of the day and to study the other part if we live to see it and come home part of the day to see our mothers and sisters and cousins if we are got any and see our kind folks and to be good boys and when we get a man to get the poor slaves from bondage. And I am sorrow to hear that the boat... went down with 200 poor slaves from up the river. Oh how sorrow I am to hear that, it grieves my heart so drat I could faint in one minute. White abolitionists did courageous and pioneering work, on the lecture platform, in newspapers, in the Underground Railroad. Black abolitionists, less publicized, were the backbone of the antislavery movement. Before Garrison published his famous Liberator in Boston in 1831, the first national convention of Negroes had been held, David Walker had already written his "Appeal," and a black abolitionist magazine named Freedom's Journal had appeared. Of The Liberator's first twenty-five subscribers, most were black. Blacks had to struggle constantly with the unconscious racism of white abolitionists. They also had to insist on their own independent voice. Douglass wrote for The Liberator, hut in 1847 started his own newspaper in Rochester, North Star, which led to a break with Garrison. In 1854, a conference of Negroes declared: ". . . it is emphatically our battle; no one else can fight it for us. . . . Our relations to the Anti-Slavery movement must be and are changed. Instead of depending upon it we must lead it." Certain black women faced the triple hurdle-of being abolitionists in a slave society, of being black among white reformers, and of being women in a reform movement dominated by men. When Sojourner Truth rose to speak in 1853 in New York City at the Fourth National Woman's Rights Convention, it all came together. There was a hostile mob in the hall shouting, jeering, threatening. She said: I know that it feels a kind o' hissin' and ticklin' like to see a colored woman get up and tell you about things, and Woman's Rights. We have all been thrown down so low that nobody thought we'd ever get up again; but ... we will come up again, and now I'm here. . . . we'll have our rights; see if we don't; and you can't stop us from them; see if you can. You may hiss as much as yon like, but it is comin'. ... I am sitrin' among you to watch; and every once and awhile I will come out and tell you what time of night it is. ... After Nat Turner's violent uprising and Virginia's bloody repression, the security system inside the South became tighter. Perhaps only an outsider could hope to launch a rebellion. It was such a person, a white man of ferocious courage and determination, John Brown, whose wild scheme it was to seize the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry, Virginia, and then set off a revolt of slaves through the South. Harriet Tubman, 5 feet tall, some of her teeth missing, a veteran of countless secret missions piloting blacks out of slavery, was involved with John Brown and his plans. But sickness prevented her from joining him. Frederick Douglass too had met with Brown. He argued against the plan from the standpoint of its chances of success, but he admired the ailing man of sixty, tall, gaunt, white-haired. Douglass was right; the plan would not work. The local militia, joined by a hundred marines under the command of Robert E. Lee, surrounded the insurgents. Although his men were dead or captured, John Brown refused to surrender: he barricaded himself in a small brick building near the gate of the armory. The troops battered down a door; a marine lieutenant moved in and struck Brown with his sword. Wounded, sick, he was interrogated. W. E. B. Du Bois, in his book John Brown, writes: Picture the situation: An old and blood-bespattered man, half-dead from the wounds inflicted but a few hours before; a man lying in the cold and dirt, without sleep for fifty-five nervewrecking hours, without food for nearly as long, with the dead bodies of his two sons almost before his eyes, the piled corpses of his seven slain comrades near and afar, a wife and a bereaved family listening in vain, and a Lost Cause, the dream of a lifetime, lying dead in his heart. . . . Lying there, interrogated by the governor of Virginia, Brown said: "You had better-all you people at the South-prepare yourselves for a settlement of this question.. . . You may dispose of me very easily-I am nearly disposed of now, but this question is still to be settled,-this Negro question, I mean; the end of that is not yet." Du Bois appraises Brown's action: If his foray was the work of a handful of fanatics, led by a lunatic and repudiated by the slaves to a man, then the proper procedure would have been to ignore the incident, quietly punish the worst offenders and either pardon the misguided leader or send him to an asylum... . While insisting that the raid was too hopelessly and ridiculously small to accomplish anything .. . the state nevertheless spent $250,000 to punish the invaders, stationed from one to three thousand soldiers in the vicinity and threw the nation into turmoil. In John Brown's last written statement, in prison, before he was hanged, he said: "T, John Brown, am quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away but with blood." Ralph Waldo Emerson, not an activist himself, said of the execution of John Brown: "He will make the gallows holy as the cross." Of the twenty-two men in John Brown's striking force, five were black. Two of these were killed on the spot, one escaped, and two were hanged by the authorities. Before his execution, John Copeland wrote to his parents: Remember that if I must the T the in trying to liberate a few of my poor and oppressed people from my condition of servitude which Cod in his Holy Writ has hurled his most bitter denunciations against ... I am not terrified by the gallows.... I imagine that I hear you, and all of you, mother, father, sisters, and brothers, say-"No, there is not a cause for which we, with less sorrow, could see you the." Believe me when I tell you, that though shut up in prison and under sentence of death, I have spent more happy hours here, and .. . T would almost as lief the now as at any time, for I feel that I am prepared to meet my Maker. .. . John Brown was executed by the state of Virginia with the approval of the national government. It was the national government which, while weakly enforcing the law ending the slave trade, sternly enforced the laws providing for the return of fugitives to slavery. It was the national government that, in Andrew Jackson's administration, collaborated with the South to keep abolitionist literature out of the mails in the southern states. It was the Supreme Court of the United States that declared in 1857 that the slave Dred Scott could not sue for his freedom because he was not a person, but property. Such a national government would never accept an end to slavery by rebellion. It would end slavery only under conditions controlled by whites, and only when required by the political and economic needs of the business elite of the North. It was Abraham Lincoln who combined perfectly the needs of business, the political ambition of the new Republican party, and the rhetoric of humanitarianism. He would keep the abolition of slavery not at the top of his list of priorities, but close enough to the top so it could be pushed there temporarily by abolitionist pressures and by practical political advantage. Lincoln could skillfully blend the interests of the very rich and the interests of the black at a moment in history when these interests met. And he could link these two with a growing section of Americans, the white, up-and-coming, economically ambitious, politically active middle class. As Richard Ilofstadter puts it: Thoroughly middle class in his ideas, he spoke for those millions of Americans who had begun their lives as hired workers-as farm hands, clerks, teachers, mechanics, flatboat men, and rail-splitters-and had passed into the ranks of landed farmers, prosperous grocers, lawyers, merchants, physicians and politicians. Lincoln could argue with lucidity and passion against slavery on moral grounds, while acting cautiously in practical politics. lie believed "that the institution of slavery is founded on injustice and bad policy, but that the promulgation of abolition doctrines tends to increase rather than abate its evils." (Put against this Frederick Douglass's statement on struggle, or Garrison's "Sir, slavery will not be overthrown without excitement, a most tremendous excitement") Lincoln read the Constitution strictly, to mean that Congress, because of the Tenth Amendment (reserving to the states powers not specifically given to the national government), could not constitutionally bar slavery in the states. When it was proposed to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, which did not have the rights of a state bat was directly under the jurisdiction of Congress, Lincoln said this would be Constitutional, but it should not be done unless the people in the District wanted it. Since most there were white, this killed the idea. As Hofstadter said of Lincoln's statement, it "breathes the fire of an uncompromising insistence on moderation." Lincoln refused to denounce the Fugitive Slave Law publicly. He wrote to a friend: "I confess T hate to see the poor creatures hunted down . .. but I bite my lips and keep quiet." And when he did propose, in 1849, as a Congressman, a resolution to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, he accompanied this with a section requiring local authorities to arrest and return fugitive slaves coming into Washington. (This led Wendell Phillips, the Boston abolitionist, to refer to him years later as "that slavehound from Illinois.") He opposed slavery, but could not see blacks as equals, so a constant theme in his approach was to free the slaves and to send them back to Africa. In his 1858 campaign in Illinois for the Senate against Stephen Douglas, Lincoln spoke differently depending on the views of his listeners (and also perhaps depending on how close it was to the election). Speaking in northern Illinois in July (in Chicago), he said: Let us discard all this quibbling about this man and the other man, this race and that race and the other race being inferior, and therefore they must be placed in an inferior position. Let us discard all these things, and unite as one people throughout this land, until we shall once more stand up declaring that all men are created equal. Two months later in Charleston, in southern Illinois, Lincoln told his audience: I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races (applause); that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people.. . . And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and J as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. Behind the secession of the South from the Union, after Lincoln was elected President in the fall of 1860 as candidate of the new Republican party, was a long series of policy clashes between South and North. The clash was not over slavery as a moral institution-most northerners did not care enough about slavery to make sacrifices for it, certainly not the sacrifice of war. It was not a clash of peoples (most northern whites were not economically favored, not politically powerful; most southern whites were poor farmers, not decisionmakers) hut of elites. The northern elite wanted economic expansion-free land, free labor, a free market, a high protective tariff for manufacturers, a bank of the United States. The slave interests opposed all that; they saw Lincoln and the Republicans as making continuation of their pleasant and prosperous way of life impossible in the future. So, when Lincoln was elected, seven southern states seceded from the Union. Lincoln initiated hostilities by trying to repossess the federal base at Fort Sumter, South Carolina, and four more states seceded. The Confederacy was formed; the Civil War was on.
| American Civil War |
|---|
Clockwise from top: Battle of Gettysburg, Union Captain John Tidball's artillery, Confederate prisoners, ironcladUSS Atlanta, ruins of Richmond, Virginia, Battle of Franklin |
|
|
| Belligerents |
|---|
 United States |  Confederate States |
| Commanders and leaders |
|---|
|
|
|
| Strength |
|---|
2,100,000:
|
1,064,000:
|
| Casualties and losses |
|---|
112,000 killed in action/died of wounds [2][3]25,000 died in Confederate prisons [2] |
75,000–94,000 killed in action/died of wounds [2]26,000–31,000 died in Union prisons [3]
≈260,000 total dead
137,000+ wounded |
| Total estimated 625,000–850,000 dead[5] |
Lincoln's first Inaugural Address, in March 1861, was conciliatory toward the South and the seceded states: "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so." And with the war four months on, when General John C. Fremont in Missouri declared martial law and said slaves of owners resisting the United States were to he free, Lincoln countermanded this order. He was anxious to hold in the Union the slave states of Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri, and Delaware. it was only as the war grew more bitter, the casualties mounted, desperation to win heightened, and the criticism of the abolitionists threatened to unravel the tattered coalition behind Lincoln that he began to act against slavery. Hofstadter puts it this way: "Like a delicate barometer, he recorded the trend of pressures, and as the Radical pressure increased he moved toward the left." Wendell Phillips said that if Lincoln was able to grow "it is because we have watered him." Racism in the North was as entrenched as slavery in the South, and it would take the war to shake both. New York blacks could not vote unless they owned $250 in property (a qualification not applied to whites). A proposal to abolish this, put on the ballot in 1860, was defeated two to one (although Lincoln carried New York by 50,000 votes). Frederick Douglass commented: "The black baby of Negro suffrage was thought too ugly to exhibit on so grand an occasion. The Negro was stowed away like some people put out of sight their deformed children when company comes." Wendell Phillips, with all his criticism of Lincoln, recognized the possibilities in his election. Speaking at the Tremont Temple in Boston the day after the election, Phillips said: If the telegraph speaks truth, for the first time in our history the slave has chosen a President of the United States. . . . Not an Abolitionist, hardly an antislavcry man, Mr. Lincoln consents to represent an antislavery idea. A pawn on the political chessboard, his value is in his position; with fair effort, we may soon change him for knight, bishop or queen, and sweep the board. (Applause) Conservatives in the Boston upper classes wanted reconciliation with the South. At one point they stormed an abolitionist meeting at that same Tremont Temple, shortly after Lincoln's election, and asked that concessions be made to the South "in the interests of commerce, manufactures, agriculture." The spirit of Congress, even after the war began, was shown in a resolution it passed in the summer of 1861, with only a few dissenting votes: "... this war is not waged . . . for any purpose of... overthrowing or interfering with the rights of established institutions of those states, but... to preserve the Union." The abolitionists stepped up their campaign. Emancipation petitions poured into Congress in 1861 and 1862. In May of that year, Wendell Phillips said: "Abraham Lincoln may not wish it; he cannot prevent it; the nation may not will it, but the nation cannot prevent it. I do not care what men want or wish; the negro is the pebble in the cog-wheel, and the machine cannot go on until you get him out." In July Congress passed a Confiscation Act, which enabled the freeing of slaves of those fighting the Union. But this was not enforced by the Union generals, and Lincoln ignored the nonenforcement. Garrison called Lincoln's policy "stumbling, halting, prevaricating, irresolute, weak, besotted," and Phillips said Lincoln was "a first-rate second-rate man." An exchange of letters between Lincoln and Horace Greeley, editor of the New York Tribune, in August of 1862, gave Lincoln a chance to express his views. Greeley wrote: Dear Sir. I do not intrude to tell you-for you must know already-that a great proportion of those who triumphed in your election ... are sorely disappointed and deeply pained by the policy you seem to be pursuing with regard to the slaves of rebels,... We require of you, as the first servant of the Republic, charged especially and preeminently with this duty, that you EXECUTE THE LAWS. ... We think you arc strangely and disastrously remiss . .. with regard to the emancipating provisions of the new Confiscation Act.... We think you are unduly influenced by the councils ... of certain politicians hailing from the Border Slave States. Greeley appealed to the practical need of winning the war. "We must have scouts, guides, spies, cooks, teamsters, diggers and choppers from the blacks of the South, whether we allow them to fight for us or not.... I entreat you to render a hearty and unequivocal obedience to the law of the land." Lincoln had already shown his attitude by his failure to countermand an order of one of his commanders, General Henry Halleck, who forbade fugitive Negroes to enter his army's lines. Now he replied to Greeley: Dear Sir: ... I have not meant to leave any one in doubt. .. . My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy Slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could do it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do about Slavery and the colored race, T do because it helps to save this Union; and what T forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. . .. T have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty, and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men, everywhere, could be free. Yours. A. Lincoln. So Lincoln distinguished between his "personal wish" and his "official duty." When in September 1862, Lincoln issued his preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, it was a military move, giving the South four months to stop rebelling, threatening to emancipate their slaves if they continued to fight, promising to leave slavery untouched in states that came over to the North: That on the 1st day of January, AD 1863, all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States shall be then, thenceforward and forever free. . . . Thus, when the Emancipation Proclamation was issued January 1, 1863, it declared slaves free in those areas still fighting against the Union (which it listed very carefully), and said nothing about slaves behind Union lines. As Hofstadter put it, the Emancipation Proclamation "had all the moral grandeur of a bill of lading." The London Spectator wrote concisely: "The principle is not that a human being cannot justly own another, hut that he cannot own him unless he is loyal to the United States." Limited as it was, the Emancipation Proclamation spurred antislavery forces.
By the summer of 1864, 400,000 signatures asking legislation to end slavery had been gathered and sent to Congress, something unprecedented in the history of the country. That April, the Senate had adopted the Thirteenth Amendment, declaring an end to slavery, and in January 1865, the House of Representatives followed. With the Proclamation, the Union army was open to blacks. And the more blacks entered the war, the more it appeared a war for their liberation. The more whites had to sacrifice, the more resentment there was, particularly among poor whites in the North, who were drafted by a law that allowed the rich to buy their way out of the draft for $300. And so the draft riots of 1863 took place, uprisings of angry whites in northern cities, their targets not the rich, far away, but the blacks, near at hand. It was an orgy of death and violence. A black man in Detroit described what he saw: a mob, with kegs of beer on wagons, armed with clubs and bricks, marching through the city, attacking black men, women, children. He heard one man say: "If we are got to he killed up for Negroes then we will kill every one in this town." The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in human history up to that time: 600,000 dead on both sides, in a population of 30 million-the equivalent, in the United States of 1978, with a population of 250 million, of 5 million dead. As the battles became more intense, as the bodies piled up, as war fatigue grew, the existence of blacks in the South, 4 million of them, became more and more a hindrance to the South, and more and more an opportunity for the North. Du Bois, in Black Reconstruction, pointed this out: .. . these slaves had enormous power in their hands. Simply by stopping work, they could threaten the Confederacy with starvation. By walking into the Federal camps, they showed to doubting Northerners the easy possibility of using them thus, but by the same gesture, depriving their enemies of their use in just these fields.... It was this plain alternative that brought Lee's sudden surrender. Either the South must make terms with its slaves, free them, use them to fight the North, and thereafter no longer treat them as bondsmen; or they could surrender to the North with the assumption that the North after the war must help them to defend slavery, as it had before. George Rawick, a sociologist and anthropologist, describes the development of blacks up to and into the Civil War: The slaves went from being frightened human beings, thrown among strange men, including fellow slaves who were not their kinsmen and who did not speak their language or understand their customs and habits, to what W. E. B. DuBois once described as the general strike whereby hundreds of thousands of slaves deserted the plantations, destroying the Smith's ability to supply its army. Black women played an important part in the war, especially toward the end. Sojourner Truth, the legendary ex-slave who had been active in the women's rights movement, became recruiter of black troops for the Union army, as did Josephine St. Pierre Ruffin of Boston. Harriet Tubman raided plantations, leading black and white troops, and in one expedition freed 750 slaves. Women moved with the colored regiments that grew as the Union army marched through the South, helping their husbands, enduring terrible hardships on the long military treks, in which many children died. They suffered the fate of soldiers, as in April 1864, when Confederate troops at Fort Pillow, Kentucky, massacred Union soldiers who had surrendered-black and white, along with women and children in an adjoining camp. It has been said that black acceptance of slavery is proved by the fact that during the Civil War, when there were opportunities for escape, most slaves stayed on the plantation. In fact, half a million ran away- about one in five, a high proportion when one considers that there was great difficulty in knowing where to go and how to live.
The owner of a large plantation in South Carolina and Georgia wrote in 1862: "This war has taught us the perfect impossibility of placing the least confidence in the negro. In too numerous instances those we esteemed the most have been the first to desert us." That same year, a lieutenant in the Confederate army and once mayor of Savannah, Georgia, wrote: "I deeply regret to learn that the Negroes still continue to desert to the enemy." A minister in Mississippi wrote in the fall of 1862: "On my arrival was surprised to hear that our negroes stampeded to the Yankees last night or rather a portion of them.... I think every one, but with one or two exceptions will go to the Yankees. Eliza and her family are certain to go. She does not conceal her thoughts but plainly manifests her opinions by her conductinsolent and insulting." And a woman's plantation journal of January 1865: The people are all idle on the plantations, most of them seeking their own pleasure. Many servants have proven faithful, others false and rebellious against all authority and restraint. .. . Their condition is one of perfect anarchy and rebellion. They have placed themselves in perfect antagonism to their owners and to all government and control.. . . Nearly all the house servants have left their homes; and from most of the plantations they have gone in a body.
Also in 1865, a South Carolina planter wrote to the New York Tribune that the conduct of the Negro in the late crisis of our affairs has convinced me that we were all laboring under a delusion.... I believed that these people were content, happy, and attached to their masters. But events and reflection have caused me to change these positions.. .. If they were content, happy and attached to their masters, why did they desert him in the moment of his need and flock to an enemy, whom they did not know; and thus left their perhaps really good masters whom they did know from infancy? Genovese notes that the war produced no general rising of slaves, but: "In Lafayette County, Mississippi, slaves responded to the Emancipation Proclamation by driving off their overseers and dividing the land and implements among themselves." Aptheker reports a conspiracy of Negroes in Arkansas in 1861 to kill their enslavers. In Kentucky that year, houses and barns were burned by Negroes, and in the city of New Castle slaves paraded through the city "singing political songs, and shouting for Lincoln," according to newspaper accounts. After the Emancipation Proclamation, a Negro waiter in Richmond, Virginia, was arrested for leading "a servile plot," while in Yazoo City, Mississippi, slaves burned the courthouse and fourteen homes. There were special moments: Robert Smalls (later a South Carolina Congressman) and other blacks took over a steamship, The Planter, and sailed it past the Confederate guns to deliver it to the Union navy. Most slaves neither submitted nor rebelled. They continued to work, waiting to see what happened. When opportunity came, they left, often joining the Union army. Two hundred thousand blacks were in the army and navy, and 38,000 were killed. Historian James McPherson says: "Without their help, the North could not have won the war as soon as it did, and perhaps it could not have won at all." What happened to blacks in the Union army and in the northern cities during the war gave some hint of how limited the emancipation would be, even with full victory over the Confederacy. Off-duty black soldiers were attacked in northern cities, as in Zanesvillc, Ohio, in February 1864, where cries were heard to "kill the nigger." Black soldiers were used for the heaviest and dirtiest work, digging trenches, hauling logs and camion, loading ammunition, digging wells for white regiments. White privates received $13 a month; Negro privates received $10 a month. Late in the war, a black sergeant of the Third South Carolina Volunteers, William Walker, marched his company to his captain's tent and ordered them to stack arms and resign from the army as a protest against what he considered a breach of contract, because of unequal pay. He was court-martialed and shot for mutiny. Finally, in June 1864, Congress passed a law granting equal pay to Negro soldiers. The Confederacy was desperate in the latter part of the war, and some of its leaders suggested the slaves, more and more an obstacle to their cause, be enlisted, used, and freed. After a number of military defeats, the Confederate secretary of war, Judah Benjamin, wrote in late 1864 to a newspaper editor in Charleston: ". . . It is well known that General Lee, who commands so largely the confidence of the people, is strongly in favor of our using the negroes for defense, and emancipating them, if necessary, for that purpose. . . ." One general, indignant, wrote: "If slaves will make good soldiers, our whole theory of slavery is wrong." By early 1865, the pressure had mounted, and in March President Davis of the Confederacy signed a "Negro Soldier Law" authorizing the enlistment of slaves as soldiers, to be freed by consent of their owners and their state governments. But before it had any significant effect, the war was over. Former slaves, interviewed by the Federal Writers' Project in the thirties, recalled the war's end. Susie Melton: I was a young gal, about ten years old, and we done heard that Lincoln gonna turn the niggers free. OF missus say there wasn't nothin' to it. Then a Yankee soldier told someone in Williamsburg that Lincoln done signed the 'mancipation. Was wintertime and mighty cold that night, but everybody commenced getting ready to leave. Didn't care nothin' about missus - was going to the Union lines. And all that night the niggers danced and sang right out in the cold. Next morning at day break we all started out with blankets and clothes and pots and pans and chickens piled on our backs, 'cause missus said we couldn't take no horses or carts. And as the sun come up over the trees, the niggers started to singing: Sun, you be here and I'll be gone Sun, you be here and I'll be gime Sun, you be here and Til be gone Bye, bye, don't grieve after me Won't give you my place, not for yours Bye, bye, don't grieve after me Cause you be here and I'll be gone. Anna Woods: We wasn't there in Texas long when the soldiers marched in to tell us that we were free. ... I remembers one woman. She jumped on a barrel and she shouted. She jumped off and she shouted. She jumped hack on again and shouted some more. She kept that up for a long time, just jumping on a barrel and back off again. Annie Mae Weathers said: I remember hearing my pa say that when somebody came and hollered, "You niggers is free at last," say he just dropped his hoc and said in a queer voice, "Thank God for that." The Federal Writers' Project recorded an ex-slave named Fannie Berry: Niggers shoutin' and clappin' hands and singin'! Chillun runnin' all over the place beatin' time and yellin'! Everybody happy. Sho' did some celebratin'. Run to the kitchen and shout in the window: "Mammy, don't you cook no more. You's free! You's free!" Many Negroes understood that their status after the war, whatever their situation legally, would depend on whether they owned the land they worked on or would be forced to be semislaves for others. In 1863, a North Carolina Negro wrote that "if the strict law of right and justice is to be observed, the country around me is the entailed inheritance of the Americans of African descent, purchased by the invaluable labor of our ancestors, through a life of tears and groans, under the lash and yoke of tyranny." Abandoned plantations, however, were leased to former planters, and to white men of the North. As one colored newspaper said: "The slaves were made serfs and chained to the soil. . . . Such was the boasted freedom acquired by the colored man at the hands of the Yankee." Under congressional policy approved by Lincoln, the property confiscated during the war under the Confiscation Act of July 1862 would revert to the heirs of the Confederate owners. Dr. John Rock, a black physician in Boston, spoke at a meeting: "Why talk about compensating masters? Compensate them for what? What do you owe them? What does the slave owe them? What does society owe them? Compensate the master? . . . It is the slave who ought to be compensated. The property of the South is by right the property of the slave. . . ." Some land was expropriated on grounds the taxes were delinquent, and sold at auction. But only a few blacks could afford to buy this. In the South Carolina Sea Islands, out of 16,000 acres up for sale in March of 1863, freedmen who pooled their money were able to buy 2,000 acres, the rest being bought by northern investors and speculators. A freedman on the Islands dictated a letter to a former teacher now in Philadelphia: My Dear Young Missus: Do, my missus, tell Linkum dat we wants land - dis bery land dat is rich wid de sweat ob de face and de blood ob we back. . . . We could a bin buy all we want, but dey make dc lots too big, and cut we out. De word cum from Mass Linkum 's self, dat we take out claims and hold on ter urn, an' plant um, and he will see dat we get urn, every man ten or twenty acre. We too glad. We stake out an' list, but fore de time for plant, dese commissionaries sells to white folks all de best land. Where Linkum? In early 1865, General William T. Shcrman held a conference in Savannah, Georgia, with twenty Negro ministers and church officials, mostly former slaves, at which one of them expressed their need: "The way we can best take care of ourselves is to have land, and till it by our labor. . . ." Four days later Slierman issued "Special Field Order No. 15," designating the entire southern coastline 30 miles inland for exclusive Negro settlement. Freedmen could settle there, taking no more than 40 acres per family. By June 1865, forty thousand freedmen had moved onto new farms in this area. But President Andrew Johnson, in August of 1865, restored this land to the Confederate owners, and the freedmen were forced off, some at bayonet point. Ex-slave Thomas Hall told the Federal Writers' Project: Lincoln got the praise for freeing us, but did he do it? He gave us freedom without giving us any chance to live to ourselves and we still had to depend on the southern white man for work, food, and clothing, and he held us out of necessity and want in a state of servitude but little better than slavery. f%20the%20United%20States-%20Howard%20Zinn.pdf Howard Zinn's PEOPLE'S HISTORY
-
Replies to This Discussion
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Sunday
The American government had set out to fight the slave states in 1861, not to end slavery, but to retain the enormous national territory and market and resources. Yet, victory required a crusade, and the momentum of that crusade brought new forces into national politics: more blacks determined to make their freedom mean something; more whites-whether Freedman's Bureau officials, or teachers in the Sea Islands, or "carpetbaggers" with various mixtures of humanitarianism and personal ambition-concerned with racial equality. There was also the powerful interest of the Republican party in maintaining control over the national government, with the prospect of southern black votes to accomplish this. Northern businessmen, seeing Republican policies as beneficial to them, went along for a while. The result was that brief period after the Civil War in which southern Negroes voted, elected blacks to state legislatures and to Congress, introduced free and racially mixed public education to the South. A legal framework was constructed. The Thirteenth Amendment outlawed slavery: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." The Fourteenth Amendment repudiated the prewar Dred Scott decision by declaring that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States" were citizens. It also seemed to make a powerful statement for racial equality, severely limiting "states' rights": No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. The Fifteenth Amendment said: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." Congress passed a number of laws in the late 1860s and early 1870s in the same spirit-laws making it a crime to deprive Negroes of their rights, requiring federal officials to enforce those rights, giving Negroes the right to enter contracts and buy property without discrimination. And in 1875, a Civil Rights Act outlawed the exclusion of Negroes from hotels, theaters, railroads, and other public accommodations. With these laws, with the Union army in the South as protection, and a civilian army of officials in the Freedman's Bureau to help them, southern Negroes came forward, voted, formed political organizations, and expressed themselves forcefully on issues important to them. They were hampered in this for several years by Andrew Johnson, Vice-President under Lincoln, who became President when Lincoln was assassinated at the close of the war. Johnson vetoed bills to help Negroes; he made it easy for Confederate states to come back into the Union without guaranteeing equal rights to blacks. During his presidency, these returned southern states enacted "black codes," which made the freed slaves like serfs, still working the plantations. For instance, Mississippi in 1865 made it illegal for freedmen to rent or lease farmland, and provided for them to work under labor contracts which they could not break under penalty of prison. It also provided that the courts could assign black children under eighteen who had no parents, or whose parents were poor, to forced labor, called apprenticeships - with punishment for runaways. Andrew Johnson clashed with Senators and Congressmen who, in some cases for reasons of justice, in others out of political calculation, supported equal rights and voting for the freedman. These members of Congress succeeded in impeaching Johnson in 1868, using as an excuse that he had violated some minor statute, but the Senate fell one vote short of the two-thirds required to remove him from office. In the presidential election of that year, Republican Ulysses Grant was elected, winning by 300,000 votes, with 700,000 Negroes voting, and so Johnson was out as an obstacle. Now the southern states could come back into the Union only by approving the new Constitutional amendments. Whatever northern politicians were doing to help their cause, southern blacks were determined to make the most of their freedom, in spite of their lack of land and resources. A study of blacks in Alabama in the first years after the war by historian Peter Kolchin finds that they began immediately asserting their independence of whites, forming their own churches, becoming politically active, strengthening their family ties, trying to educate their children. Kolchin disagrees with the contention of some historians that slavery had created a "Sambo" mentality of submission among blacks. "As soon as they were free, these supposedly dependent, childlike Negroes began acting like independent men and women." Negroes were now elected to southern state legislatures, although in all these they were a minority except in the lower house of the South Carolina legislature. A great propaganda campaign was undertaken North and South (one which lasted well into the twentieth century, in the history textbooks of American schools) to show that blacks were inept, lazy, corrupt, and ruinous to the governments of the South when they were in office. Undoubtedly there was corruption, but one could hardly claim that blacks had invented political conniving, especially in the bizarre climate of financial finagling North and South after the Civil War. It was true that the public debt of South Carolina, $7 million in 1865, went up to $29 million in 1873, but the new legislature introduced free public schools for the first time into the state. Not only were seventy thousand Negro children going to school by 1876 where none had gone before, but fifty thousand white children were going to school where only twenty thousand had attended in 1860. Black voting in the period after 1869 resulted in two Negro members of the U.S. Senate (Hiram Revels and Blanche Bruce, both from Mississippi), and twenty Congressmen, including eight from South Carolina, four from North Carolina, three from Alabama, and one each from the other former Confederate states. (This list would dwindle rapidly after 1876; the last black left Congress in 1901.) A Columbia University scholar of the twentieth century, John Burgess, referred to Black Reconstruction as follows: In place of government by the most intelligent and virtuous part of the people for the benefit of the governed, here was government by the most ignorant and vicious part of the population.... A black skin means membership in a race of men which has never of itself succeeded in subjecting passion to reason; has never, therefore, created civilization of any kind. One has to measure against those words the black leaders in the postwar South. For instance, Henry MacNeal Turner, who had escaped from peonage on a South Carolina plantation at the age of fifteen, taught himself to read and write, read law books while a messenger in a lawyer's office in Baltimore, and medical books while a handyman in a Baltimore medical school, served as chaplain to a Negro regiment, and then was elected to the first postwar legislature of Georgia. In 1868, the Georgia legislature voted to expel all its Negro members-two senators, twenty-five representatives-and Turner spoke to the Georgia House of Representatives (a black woman graduate student at Atlanta University later brought his speech to light): Mr. Speaker.. . . T wish the members of this House to understand the position that I take. I hold that I am a member of this body. Therefore, sir, I shall neither fawn or cringe before any party, nor stoop to beg them for my rights. .. . I am here to demand my rights, and to hurl thunderbolts at the men who would dare to cross the threshold of my manhood. . . . The scene presented in this House, today, is one unparalleled in the history of the world.... Never, in the history of the world, has a man been arraigned before a body clothed with legislative, judicial or executive functions, charged with the offense of being of a darker hue than his fellow-men. ... it has remained for the State of Georgia, in the very heart of the nineteenth century, to call a man before the bar, and there charge him with an act for which he is no more responsible than for the head which he carries upon his shoulders. The AngloSaxon race, sir, is a most surprising one.... I was not aware that there was in the character of that race so much cowardice, or so much pusillanimity. ... I tell you, sir, that this is a question which will not the today. This event shall be remembered by posterity for ages yet to come, and while the sun shall continue to climb the hills of heaven.... . . . we arc told mat if black men want to speak, they must speak through white trumpets; if black men want their sentiments expressed, they must be adulterated and sent through white messengers, who will quibble, and equivocate, and evade, as rapidly as me pendulum of a clock.. . . The great question, sir is this: Am I a man? If I am such, I claim the rights of a man.. . . Why, sir, though we are not white, we have accomplished much. We have pioneered civilization here; we have built up your country; we have worked in your fields, and garnered your harvests, for two hundred and fifty years! And what do we ask of you in return? Do we ask you for compensation for the sweat our fathers bore for you-for the rears you have caused, and the hearts you have broken, and the lives you have curtailed, and the blood you have spilled? Do we ask retaliation? We ask it not. We are willing to let the dead past bury its dead; but we ask you now for our RIGHTS. .. . As black children went to school, they were encouraged by teachers, black and white, to express themselves freely, sometimes in catechism style. The records of a school in Louisville, Kentucky: TEACHER: Now children, you don't think white people are any better than you because they have straight hair and white faces? STUDENTS: No, sir. TEACHER: No, they are no better, but they arc different, they possess great power, they formed this great government, they control this vast country. . . . Now what makes them different from you? STUDENTS: Money! TEACHER: Yes, but what enabled them to obtain it? How did they get money? STUDF.NTS: Got it off us, stole it off we all! Black women helped rebuild the postwar South. Frances Ellen Watldns Harper, born tree in Baltimore, self-supporting from the age of thirteen, working as a nursemaid, later as an abolitionist lecturer, reader of her own poetry, spoke all through the southern states after the war. She was a feminist, participant in the 1866 Woman's Rights Convention, and founder of the National Association of Colored Women. In the 1890s she wrote the first novel published by a black woman: lola Leroy or Shadows Uplifted. In 1878 she described what she had seen and heard recently in the South: An acquaintance of mine, who lives in South Carolina, and has been engaged in mission work, reports that, in supporting the family, women are the mainstay; that two-thirds of the truck gardening is done by them in South Carolina; that in the city they are more industrious than the men. . ., When the men lose their work through their political affiliations, the women stand by them, and say, "stand by your principles." Through all the struggles to gain equal rights for blacks, certain black women spoke out on their special situation. Sojourner Truth, at a meeting of the American Equal Rights Association, said: There is a great stir about colored men getting their rights, but not a word about the colored women; and if colored men get their rights, and not colored women theirs, you sec the colored men will be masters over the women, and it will be just as bad as it was before. So T am for keeping the thing going while things are stirring; because if we wait till it is still, it will take a great while to get it going again... . I am above eighty years old; it is about time for me to be going. T have been forty years a slave and forty years free, and would be here forty years more to have equal rights for all. I suppose I am kept here because some-thing remains for me to do; I suppose I am yet to help break the chain. I have done a great deal of work; as much as a man, but did not get so much pay. I used to work in the field and bind grain, keeping with the cradler; but men doing no more, got twice as much pay-... I suppose T am about the only colored woman that goes about to speak for the rights of the colored women. I want to keep the thing stirring, now that the ice is cracked. . . . The Constitutional amendments were passed, the laws for racial equality were passed, and the black man began to vote and to hold office. Cut so long as the Negro remained dependent on privileged whites for work, for the necessities of life, his vote could be bought or taken away by threat of force. Thus, laws calling for equal treatment became meaningless. While Union troops-including colored troops- remained in the South, this process was delayed. But the balance of military powers began to change. The southern white oligarchy used its economic power to organize the Ku Klux Klan and other terrorist groups. Northern politicians began to weigh the advantage of the political support of impoverished blacks-maintained in voting and office only by force-against the more stable situation of a South returned to white supremacy, accepting Republican dominance and business legislation. It was only a matter of time before blacks would be reduced once again to conditions not far from slavery. Violence began almost immediately with the end of the war. In Memphis, Tennessee, in May of 1866, whites on a rampage of murder killed forty-six Negroes, most of them veterans of the Union army, as well as two white sympathizers. Five Negro women were raped. Ninety homes, twelve schools, and four churches were burned. In New Orleans, in the summer of 1866, another riot against blacks killed thirty-five Negroes and three whites. Mrs. Sarah Song testified before a congressional investigating committee: Have you been a slave? I have been a slave. What did you see of the rioting? I saw them kill my husband; it was on Tuesday night, between ten and eleven o'clock; be was shot in the head while he was in bed sick, . .. There were between twenty and thirty men.. . . They came into the room. . . . Then one stepped back and shot him . . . he was not a yard from him; be put the pistol to his head and shot him three times. . .. Then one of them kicked him, and another shot him again when he was down. . .. He never spoke after he fell. They then went running right off and did not come back again. .. . The violence mounted through the late 1860s and early 1870s as the Ku Klux Klan organized raids, lynchings, beatings, burnings. For Kentucky alone, between 1867 and 1871, the National Archives lists 116 acts of violence. A sampling: 1. A mob visited Harrodsburg in Mercer County to take from jail a man name Robertson Nov. 14, 1867.. . . 5. Sam Davis hung by a mob in Harrodsburg, May 28, 1868. 6. Wm. Pierce hung by a mob in Christian July 12, 1868. 7. Geo. Roger hung by a mob in Bradsfordville Martin County July 11, 1868. ... 10. Silas Woodford age sixty badly beaten by disguised mob. . .. 109. Negro killed by Ku Klux Klan in Hay county January 14, 1871. A Negro blacksmith named Charles Caldwell, born a slave, later elected to the Mississippi Senate, and known as "a notorious and turbulent Negro" by whites, was shot at by the son of a white Mississippi judge in 1868. Caldwcll fired back and killed the man. Tried by an allwhite jury, he argued self-defense and was acquitted, the first Negro to kill a white in Mississippi and go free after a trial. But on Christmas Day 1875, Caldwell was shot to death by a white gang. It was a sign. The old white rulers were taking back political power in Mississippi, and everywhere else in the South. As white violence rose in the 1870s, the national government, even under President Grant, became less enthusiastic about defending blacks, •and certainly not prepared to arm them. The Supreme Court played its gyroscopic role of pulling the other branches of government back to more conservative directions when they went too far. It began interpreting the Fourteenth Amendment-passed presumably for racial equality-in a way that made it impotent for this purpose. In 1883, the Civil Rights Act of 1875, outlawing discrimination against Negroes using public facilities, was nullified by the Supreme Court, which said: "Individual invasion of individual rights is not the subject-matter of the amendment." The Fourteenth Amendment, it said, was aimed at state action only. "No state shall ..." A remarkable dissent was written by Supreme Court Justice John Harlan, himself a former slaveowner in Kentucky, who said there was Constitutional justification for banning private discrimination. He noted that the Thirteenth Amendment, which banned slavery, applied to individual plantation owners, not just the state. He then argued that discrimination was a badge of slavery and similarly outlawable. He pointed also to the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, saying that anyone born in the United States was a citizen, and to the clause in Article 4, Section 2, saying "the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States." Ilarlan was fighting a force greater than logic or justice; the mood of the Court reflected a new coalition of northern industrialists and southern businessmen-planters. The culmination of this mood came in the decision of 1896, Plessy v. Ferguson, when the Court ruled that a railroad could segregate black and white if the segregated facilities were equal: The object of the amendment was undoubtedly to enforce the absolute equality of the two races before the law, but in the nature of things it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color, or to enforce social, as distinguished from political equality, or a commingling of the two races upon terms unsatisfactory to either. Ilarlan again dissented: "Our Constitution is color-blind.. .." It was the year 1877 that spelled out clearly and dramatically what was happening. When the year opened, the presidential election of the past November was in bitter dispute. The Democratic candidate, Samuel Tilden, had 184 votes and needed one more to be elected: his popular vote was greater by 250,000. The Republican candidate, Rutherford Hayes, had 166 electoral votes. Three states not yet counted had a total of 19 electoral votes; if Hayes could get all of those, he would have 185 and be President. This is what his managers proceeded to arrange. They made concessions to the Democratic party and the white South, including an agreement to remove Union troops from the South, the last military obstacle to the reestablishment of white supremacy there. Northern political and economic interests needed powerful allies and stability in the face of national crisis. The country had been in economic depression since 1873, and by 1877 farmers and workers were beginning to rebel. As C. Vann Woodward puts it in his history of the 1877 Compromise, Reunion and Reaction: It was a depression year, the worst year of the severest depression yet experienced. In the East labor and the unemployed were in a bitter and violent temper. . . . Out West a tide of agrarian radicalism was rising.. . . From both East and West came threats against the elaborate structure of protective tariffs, national banks, railroad subsidies and monetary arrangements upon which the new economic order was founded. It was a time for reconciliation between southern and northern elites. Woodward asks: "... could the South be induced to combine with the Northern conservatives and become a prop instead of a menace to the new capitalist order?" With billions of dollars' worth of slaves gone, the wealth of the old South was wiped out. They now looked to the national government for help: credit, subsidies, flood control projects. The United States in 1865 had spent $103,294,501 on public works, but the South received only $9,469,363. For instance, while Ohio got over a million dollars, Kentucky, her neighbor south of the river, got $25,000. While Maine got $3 million, Mississippi got $136,000. While $83 million had been given to subsidize the Union Pacific and Central Pacific railroads, thus creating a transcontinental railroad through the North, there was no such subsidy for the South. So one of the things the South looked for was federal aid to the Texas and Pacific Railroad.
Note: The entity State of Hawaii looked for federal aid to the Rail.
-
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Sunday
Note: The United States passed an Amendment to the U.S. Constitution called the 13th Amendment -
13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Abolition of Slavery (1865)
|
Citation: The House Joint Resolution proposing the 13th amendment to the Constitution, January 31, 1865; Enrolled Acts and Resolutions of Congress, 1789-1999; General Records of the United States Government; Record Group 11; National Archives. How to use citation info.(on Archives.gov)
Passed by Congress on January 31, 1865, and ratified on December 6, 1865, the 13th amendment abolished slavery in the United States.
The 13th amendment, which formally abolished slavery in the United States, passed the Senate on April 8, 1864, and the House on January 31, 1865. On February 1, 1865, President Abraham Lincoln approved the Joint Resolution of Congress submitting the proposed amendment to the state legislatures. The necessary number of states ratified it by December 6, 1865. The 13th amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
In 1863 President Lincoln had issued the Emancipation Proclamation declaring “all persons held as slaves within any State, or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free.” Nonetheless, the Emancipation Proclamation did not end slavery in the nation. Lincoln recognized that the Emancipation Proclamation would have to be followed by a constitutional amendment in order to guarantee the abolishment of slavery.
The 13th amendment was passed at the end of the Civil War before the Southern states had been restored to the Union and should have easily passed the Congress. Although the Senate passed it in April 1864, the House did not. At that point, Lincoln took an active role to ensure passage through congress. He insisted that passage of the 13th amendment be added to the Republican Party platform for the upcoming Presidential elections. His efforts met with success when the House passed the bill in January 1865 with a vote of 119–56.
With the adoption of the 13th amendment, the United States found a final constitutional solution to the issue of slavery. The 13th amendment, along with the 14th and 15th, is one of the trio of Civil War amendments that greatly expanded the civil rights of Americans.
"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as punishment for crime.....shall exist within the United States...."
-
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Sunday
SUMMARY
The Hawaiian Kingdom under Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli is more progressive than the United States of America, which changed to the United States and the American Empire as documented in 1899 Court Case: Peacock.
Kamehameha III - Kauikeaouli passed the anti-slavery law in 1852 and the United States of America passed their anti-slavery law in 1865 or 13 years AFTER Kamehameha III's anti-slavery law.
Therefore, the Hawaiian Kingdom, a recognized nation was and continues to be unique, neutral, friendly, non-violent nation with documented False Flag issues by the very nation who has copied our anti-slavery law since 1865 and with intentions to enslave All Americans, yet, Americans should be secured in the fact that our 1849/50 Treaty of the Hawaiian Kingdom and the United States of America legally, lawfully secures their U.S. Constitution with their basic rights even till today.
Treaties supersedes State and Federal Laws. Treaties are the supreme law of the land. The entity State of Hawaii is Not the "successor of the Kingdom of Hawaii" but a False Flag operation of the United States in 1893.
aloha.
References: theiolani.blogspot.com http://myweb.ecomplanet.com/GORA8037
-
- Permalink Reply by Amelia Gora on Sunday
All Hawaii Stand Together by Liko Martin
-
 Permalink Reply by Tane on Monday
A few interesting notes:
In 1839, Hawaiian Kingdom's Declaration of Rights did IMPLY freedom from slavery that all man were as one, equal and God-given rights. Therefore, 1852 clarified these rights with the anti-slavery act.
Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation is over-rated since the intention was to enlist the enslaved blacks with the idea that they would earn their freedom. This was Lincoln's maneuver since the Union was LOSING the war ad the strategy of enlisting the black slaves to tip the scale of army power over the South.
Lincoln supported the stance of blacks being separate but equal within the U.S. and Jim Crow laws became quite popular which Lincoln supported. Racial segregation became a mainstay in U.S. society. It was also unlawful for mixed-race marriages of blacks and whites within the U.S. until the 1960s. De-segregation of schools was enforced in the 1960s.
The 14th Amendment was never ratified; thus, is not lawful nor effective. I believe at that time, it needed 26 states to ratify it to make it law.
These points was one of the major reasons that I was against the statehood act. Who'd want to be drawn into a racist country? When I was born in 1943, Hawaii was still considered a foreign country by U.S. citizens and the rest of the world. Those that relocated to Hawaii was encouraged to do so with the promise of Hawaii becoming a U.S. State if there was sufficient U.S. citizens residing in Hawaii; their vote would ensure it. Ordinance to being allowed to vote was reduced from one-year residence to 6 months residence to qualify to vote in Hawaii. This would ensure the vote in the passage of statehood to the U.S. That's how the voting was stacked. Of all qualified voters, one had to be an affirmed U.S. citizen to vote; thus, only about 36% of eligible voters voted in that plebiscite.
The choice was to remain a U.S. territory with limited rights or to become a state with full rights afforded to other states in its union. One would now be able to vote for its own governor rather than the U.S.-appointed governor; one could run and vote for U.S. President; and one could be an active member in U.S. Congress with voting privileges rather than an observer as a delegate from Hawaii. It would be taxation WITH representation. It sounded more like a bait and switch proposal.
Today, slavery continues but in another form. Slave wages and one-sided justice prevails in Hawaii with U.S. and military control. This is why it's imperative that the U.S. de-occupy Hawaii and comply with the laws of occupation and observe Hawaii's international status as a neutral nation since 1854. The Turpie Resolution of 1894 and the Ku'e Petitions of 1897 deem it to be so.
|
|
![[Kanaka Maoli flag]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/proxy/AVvXsEjAZaeae2XqcOMB8EqamFqafO-1l6zPz9Um8fBvgWabj0rYA1-Gy1th0QuNwlM2LV1Lshn3m_s8LSBTu_LK3QSc5oPk5k52d-YCxw_7GzC208N6jRUGl6sOJEARjB7NDvzc4OzMhyD4-aEarx11b1DwBw=s0-d-e1-ft)
No comments:
Post a Comment